•^. 


-  ^'  A>. 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-3) 


/. 


,% 


k^ 


'^ 


V. 


f/. 


^ 


.<9 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


l^m    12.5 

■50  '■^"   nni^H 

M    i2.0 


2.2 


1.4 


1^ 
1.6 


p% 


Av 


"3 


Vi 


Hiotograpliic 

Sciences 
Corpordtion 


^V 


# 


;\ 


4^ 


'<b 


23  WEST  NiAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  N.Y.  14580 

(716\  872-4503 


^ 


& 
^ 


J 


CIHM/ICMH 

Microfiche 

Series. 


CIHIVI/iCMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  Microrsproductions  /  Institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiquas 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Nctas/Notes  techniques  et  bibliographjques 


The 
tot 


The  Institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


D 
D 
□ 
D 
D 


D 
D 
D 


n 


0 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couverture  de  couieur 

Covers  damaged/ 
Couverture  endommag^e 

Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaurie  et/ou  pellicuMe 

Cover  title  missing/ 

Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 

Coloured  maps/ 

Cartes  giographiques  en  couieur 


r~~|    Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  black)/ 


Encre  de  couieur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 

Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couieur 

Bound  with  other  material/ 
Relii  avec  d'autres  documents 

Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  re  liure  serrde  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distorsion  ie  long  de  la  marge  intirieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajouttes 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  ie  texte. 
mais,  lorsque  cela  Atait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  6t6  filmtes. 


L'Institut  a  microfilm^  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  lui  a  iti  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-dtre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique,  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  mithode  normale  de  filmage 
sont  indiquAs  ci-dessous. 


I      I   Coloured  pages/ 


Pages  de  couieur 

Pages  damaged/ 
Pages  endommagies 


□    Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Pages  restaurAes  et/ou  pelliculAes 


Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 


D 


Pages  dicolories,  tachet^es  ou  piqu^es 

Pages  detached/ 
Pages  ditachies 


Showthrough/ 
Transparence 


I      I    Quality  of  print  varies/ 


Quality  inigale  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  material/ 
Comprend  du  materiel  suppl^mentaire 

Only  edition  available/ 
Seule  Edition  disponible 


D 


Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc.,  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totalement  ou  partiellement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'errata,  une  pelure. 
etc.,  ont  6t6  filmies  d  nouveau  de  fapon  d 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


The 
pos 
oft 

fillT 


Ori{ 
beg 
the 
sioi 
oth 
firsi 
siof 
or  i 


Th« 
sha 
TIN 
whi 

Mai 
diff 
enti 
beg 
righ 
reqi 
mei 


Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  suppldmentaires; 


Wrinkled  pages  may  film  slightly  out  of  focus. 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  film4  au  taux  de  reduction  indiqui  ci-dessous. 

10X  14X  18X  22X 


26X 


30X 


J 

12X 


16X 


20X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


The  copy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  generosity  of: 

Library  of  the  Pubiic 
Archives  of  Canada 


L'exemplaire  filmi  f '.^t  reproduit  grflce  A  ia 
gAnArositt  de: 

La  bibiiothdque  des  Archives 
pubiiques  du  Canada 


The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Les  images  suivantes  ont  M4  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  ia  condition  at 
de  ia  nettetA  de  l'exemplaire  film6,  et  en 
conformity  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
fiimage. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  Impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  Illustrated  Impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprimte  sont  filmfo  en  commen9ant 
par  le  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
dernlAre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'Impression  ou  d'illustratlon,  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  salon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  filmfo  en  commenpant  par  la 
premlAre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'Impression  ou  d'illustratlon  et  en  termjnant  pt 
la  derniire  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  -h^  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbol  y  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 


Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparattra  sur  la 
dernlAre  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  seion  le 
cas:  le  symbols  — »•  signifie  "A  SUIVRE".  le 
symbols  V  signifie  "FIN". 


Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  cartes,  pidnches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  Atre 
filmAs  d  des  taux  de  reduction  diffirents. 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  dtre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clichA,  il  est  film6  A  partir 
de  I'angle  supArieur  gauche,  de  gauche  i  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  nicessaire.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
illustrent  la  mAthode. 


1 

2 

3 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

», 


u 


(if 


) 


© 


^ 


3. 

Mr,  Madison^s  War. 


i*U 


DlSPASSIONAtE  INQPIRt 


IHTO  THB 


ilEASONS  ALtEGED  BY  MR;  MADI6ON 

lOS  SEClABilfO  Air 

OFFENSIVE  AND  BUINOUS  WAR 
AGAINST  GBEAT-BRIf  AIN* 

^  TO6KTHXB  WITH 

SOMAetiiKiEBTIONS 


1 

'I 


^     7%»T0A 


t»EAC«»VBLE  AND  CONSTITUTIONAL  MODE 
f)**  JIVEETIJ^G   THAT  DBEJIDPUL   CALMaTlL 

BY  A  NEW-ENGLAND  FARMER. 


•'Poor  is  his  triumph,  and  disgracd  hti  name. 

Who  draws  the  swowl  for  empii-e,  -weaUh,  or  fame  j 

And  poorer  still  those  statesmen's  sh&i*^  of  praise. 

Who  at  a  tyrant's  nod  their  country's  standard  raise  : 

For  them  though  wealth  he  Mown  on  every  Wind, 

Though"  Fiance  "announce  them  mightiest  of  manlcmdj 

Though  tvnce  ten  nations  crouch  beneath  their  blade, 

Virtue  disowns  them,  and  their  glories  fade. 

For  them  nb  prayers  are  pour'd,  no  p»ans  sung. 

No  blessings  chaunted  from  a  nation's  tongue. 

Blood  msu-ks  the  path  to  their  untimely  bier ; 

The  curse  of  orphans  and  the  widow  s  tear 

Cry  to  high  Heaven  for  vengeance  on  their  head, 

Ali*e  deserted,  and  accurst  when  dead. 


mURTU  EBITlO^r. 


BdSTON  : 

PHWTED  BY  RUSSELL  V  CUTLER. 

f812. 


%^^ 


S.1  ."^N 


^- 


01  ^ 


il[ 


026688 


looii7 


'll 


m 


INTRODUCTION, 


»«.  the  rincerity  .four  .dmim,tr.ti.„r«  it  "u  el^/  ^  ?° 
eide,  whether  the  real  oMeet  ofth,  „nl.™.  •  ''  "'  "^  ^'■ 
c.«.»erei..  right,  and  iZ:l.f  :,'  hfu    ^".^^^^^^^        t 

2  «  ■  M;f ""  '"°''  "l""''"^  «"""  """tiBeUv  prove,  alj 
the  Berlin  and  Milan  decree,  were  not  renealed  ..  .h. V^        i 

they  were  pr.fe.,ed  to  be,  bnt  that  tWrZeal  if  1  h  ,  T^' 
efect,  was  only  the  resiu  rf  „„rT      '^'     ""■" '*"*«'' 

.gainst  the  .0  J J:\Zl  t  M  tTZT-.^TX"  '"'°?'"' 
them,  we  trart  we  shall  blLZeiJZ^^  '  ^  elaraeteri^ed 
mmination  of  ,hi,  men.  i„Te  ,  lee  tZVl'"-'^  '"  *' 
existing  sitnatio.  and  policy  r^tunit^S'sfa:"'"'"'  """'  *' 

as  its  80L^  cause,  that  "Conirress  Im  1  ht  .1    '      ^'^^^''^^t^^ 

««ce  to  the  British  Orders  in  CaunJ»Z  V        ''^''^*' 

that   "the  Berlin  and  Milirdfre  1.  L'Tt^  *"  '^'^^••«^' 
first  of  November  last)  consWered  al  „„  I  "^'^^  ^^'"'"  *^^ 

i-espects  American  vessels  »TI     ^         .""^  '"  *^''""  "  ^"^  «" 
merican  vessels.      The  phraseology  is  indeed  curious^ 


V-* ' 


vr  ,  > 

there  are  no  words  of  repeal  or  revocation— but  it  ifi  simply  deelar- 
«cd,  that  the  decrees  are  considered  m  no  longer  in  force  so  far  as 
respects  American  vessels.  Notwithstanding  this,  his  Majesty 
may  seize  their  cargoes  and  condemn  them  witli  a  much  smaller 
violation  of  his  imperial  word  than  we  have  sometimes  seen. 

Various,  numerous  and  important  are  the  thoughts  to  which  this 
singular  «a?  post  facto  decree  gives  rise,  and  if  some  of  them  bear 
hard  on  our  administration,  who  have  just  entered  into  an  avowed 
co-operation  and  concert  with  France,  they  are  indebted  to  their 
new  ally  for  these  reflecfions,  and  net  to  us. 

The  first  and  most  obvious  inquiry  is,  was  this  decree  really 
passed  in  JpriZ,  1811,  though  not  promulgated  till  May,  i3±2f 
or  is  this  a  decree  ante-dated  to  promote  any  political  and  sinister 

views  ? 

If  bona  fide  'ssued  on  the  day  of  its  date,  why  was  it  withheld 
from  our  minister,  Mr.  Russel,  who  wasi  during  the  months  of  May 
and  Junn,  1811,  urging  ^|ip  French  government  to  give  some  sub- 
stantial proof  of  the  repeal  of  the  French  decrees  ?  Why  was  it 
kept  back  from  the  nation  which  upon  the  face  of  it  was  tlie  onltf 
one  affected  it?  In  June^  1811,  Mr.  Russel  informed  the  French 
minuter,  that  he  kept  the  John  Adams  in  waiting  solely  that  she 
might  carry  out  to  the.  United  Stages  something  that  miglit  satisfy 
our  people  that  the  decrees  were  repealed.  Yet  on  the  14th  of  July, 
all  he  could  obtain  was  the  release  of  two  vessels  which  did  not 
eome  under  their  operaticnj  but  of  five  others  captured  after  No- 
vember, 1810,  and  coming  within  the  decrees,  not  om  of  them  was 
then,  or  has  been  yet  released. 

Mr.  Barlow  soon  after  arrived  in  France,  a  man  better  suited 
than  Mr.  Russel  to  conduct  a  negociation  in  which  the  United 
States  were  to  yield  their  independence  to  France.  He  also  in 
very  suppliant  strains  from  August,  1811,  to  February,  1812,  urged 
the  Emperor  to  furnish  sowie  proof  of  the  repeal  of  the  Berlin  and 
Milan  decrees.  Yet  his  Imperial  Majesty  did  not  recollect,  or  did 
see  fit  to  furnish  the  simplest  and  best  possible  answer,  his  pre- 
tended decree  of  April,  1811. 

If  that  decree  had  been  furnished,  Britain  probably  would  have 
lo}^  since  repealed,  her  orders  in  council,  and  this  disastrous  war 


mply  declar- 
'ee  80  far  as 
hia  Majesty 
lueh  smaller 
8  seen. 

0  which  this 
9f  them  bear 

1  an  avowed 
ited  to  their 

ecree  really 

Mmj,  181:2? 

and  sinister 

it  withheld 
mths  of  May 
^e  some  sub- 
Why  was  it 
was  Hie  onljf 

the  French 
ely  that  she 
night  satisfy 
14th  of  July, 
hich  did  not 
d  after  No- 
of  them  was 

tetter  suited 
the  United 
He  also  in 
,  1812, urged 
e  Berlin  and 
oiled,  or  did 
vw,  his  pre- 

would  have 
sastrous  war 


might  have  been  avoided.  If  that  decree  had  been  nromulnted 
the  courts  of  Prance,  Naples  and  Holland  weald  have  restored 
the  numerout  vessels  captured  or  seized  unde'  the  Berlin  and 
Milan  decrees,  and  without  that  decree  they  corM  not  do  it.  For 
Gen.  Armstrong  declared  in  one  of  his  letters,  that  the  eounetl  of 
prizes  stated  to  him  that  they  coald  take  no  other  evidence  of  the 
repeal  of  the  decrees,  than  a  solemn  imperial  edict  which  should 
annnl  them.    Why  then  was  this  evidence  withheld?  We  shall 

give  our  o^vn  suggestions  as  to  the  reasons  presently ^We  had 

not  then  promised  to  enter  into  the  war  !  ! 

But  we  ask  further,  why  if  the  decrees  were  repealed  so  ftir  as 
respects  AmeHcans,  his  ^f<y>%  tH /^c.-soji  condemned  the  Catha- 
rine, Ockington,  owned  by  John  Parker,  esq.  of  Boston,  and  others  ; 
and  four  other  ships  and  cargoes  taken  in  the  Baltick,  under  pre- 
tence  of  having  been  boarded  by  British  cruisers,  or  being  laden 
with  the  produce  of  enemies'  colonies,  in  September,  1811,  five 
months  after  the  date  of  the  pretended  decree  of  repeal  ? 

Again,  if  the  decrees  were  repealed  in  April,  1811,  why,  if  «dif 
communicated  to  us,  who  were  specially  interested,  and  to  the  world, 
were  they  kept  in  the  Emperor's  cabinet  till  1812,  and  not  comnm- 
nicated  either  to  his  court  or  his  Minister  of  Marine,  when  the 
event  to  which  they  referred  happened  in  March,  1811  ?  Why  did 
Peretier's  squadron  which  sailed  in  January,  1812,  nine«-month8 
afterwards,  sail  under  the  repealed  decrees  ?  Why  were  they  order- 
ed to  capture,  sink,  bum  and  destroy  every  American  vessel  which 
had  traded  to  an  enemy's  portf  Why  was  the  brig  owned  by  the 
Messrs.  Curtis's  of  Boston,  destroyed  by  that  squadron,  and  a 
dozen  others,  whose  losses  have  been  paid  by  our  underwriters  ? 
Why  did  the  Emperor  in  his  official  speech  to  his  senate,  lately 
referred  to  by  Mr.  Foster,  as  late  as  March  last,  still  declare  them 
to  be  the  fundamental  laws  of  his  empire  ?  How  could  they  be  re- 
pealed,  i>ud  yet  in  force  ?  There  was  no  other  nation  but  America, 
on  whom  they  would  operate,  and  yet  he  declared  them  last  March, 
the  laws  of  his  empire. 

^  In  short,  this  measure  may  be  considered  the  climax  of  Preneh 
injustice  and  intrigue.  While  their  decrees  which  operate  against 
m  are  instantly  promulgated,  and  have  sometimes  a  retrospective 


:%% 


tendetey,  this  pretended  favorable  decree  ih  eonfined  to  the  Em* 
peror's  breast  for  thirteen  months ;  or  rather,  as  we  shall  presently 
shew,  the  pri<se  given  for  it  was  an  assurance  of  a  declaration  of 
war,  and  it  was  ante-dated  to  cover  the  honor  of  onft  of  the  high 
contracting  parties. 

But  this  is  the  narrowest  and  most  favorable  view  of  this 
strange  transaction.  There  are  lights  in  which  it  ought  to  be 
considered  which  bear  as  hard  upon  our  administration  as  they  dq 
upon  France. 

Bonaparte  announces  as  the  sole  ground  of  his  pretended  repeal 
that  our  act  of  March  2, 18H,  m^s  a  rest  tance  of  the  orders  in 
council.  But  it  will  be  remembered  that  the  sole  ostensible  and 
the  oidy  plaudbk  though  unjust  gro'ind  of  our  act  of  March,  1811, 
was  the  previous  revocation  of  the  French  decrees,  on  the  jirst  of 
November,  1810. 
*  So  then  we  have  this  extraordinary  state  of  the  case. 

Congress  in  May,  1810,  passed  a  law  pretended  to  be  impartial, 
which  provided  that  the  non-intercourse  act  should  cease  as  to  the 
nation  which  should  ^rs^  repeal  its  decrees,  and  that  it  should  ope- 
rate on  the  other  which  should  fail  so  to  do. 

Mr.  Madison  declared  the  French  decrees  repealed  in  Novem- 
ber, 1810,  and  Congress  in  pursuance  of  its  pledge  to  France,  and 
apposing  the  decrees  repealed  in  November,  1810,  passed  the  nour 
importation  act  of  March  2,  1811,  operating  only  against  Great 
Britain,  and  therefore  in  effect  making  war  upon  her  alone. 

France,  regardless  of  the  character  or  consistency  of  our  adr 
ministration,  now  declares  that  her  decrees  were  not  repealed  until 
April  28, 1811,  and  then  insultingly  tells  them  that  it  is  only  it^ 
consequence  of  our  act  of  March  2, 18ll,  which  act  was  passed  as 
is  professed  only  in  consequence  of  the  supposed  and  alleged  previ- 
ous repeal  of  the  Berlin  and  Milan  decrees,  in  November,  preced- 
ing. In  any  other  view,  that  act  would  have  been  a  shameful  ex- 
ample of  partiality. 
Thus  it  seems  that  in  addition  to  the  bitter  pill  of  war,  we  are 

compelled  to  swallow  this  most  nauseous  and  disgusting  dose 

>ve  are  to  admit  that  our  retaliation  upon  France  was  first  withr 
drawn,  before  she  would  consent  to  repeal  her  decrees,  and  Mr^ 


Ir 


ed  to  the  Em. 
thall  presently 
declaration  of 
in  of  the  high 

view  of  this 
it  ought  to  be 
ion  as  they  do 

^tended  repea) 
the  orders  in 
ostensible  and 
March,  1811, 
on  the  first  of 


be  impartial, 
ease  as  to  the 
it  should  ope- 

d  in  Novem- 
France,  and 
issed  the  nour 
igaiust  Great 
alone. 

cy  of  our  adr 
repealed  until 
it  is  only  ii^ 
vas  passed  as 
illeged  previ- 
mber,  preced- 
sbameful  ex- 
war,  we  are 
sting  dose— 
18  first  withr 
ees,  and  Mr^ 


wit 

Madison  declared  to  the  worlfl  ih»t  k.-  a 

,  >WthUi.i,.t,  triumph  „fFr«n«  over  our  pride  our  l.™».     * 
.Wter,  our  j..,i.e,  ..r  taterou,  .„d  our  lilZ^ZtZlI 

l.t.  That  the  Freueh  decree,  were  .ever  iu  fact  repeUed  till 
tfc.  very  l..t  mouth  of  afcy,  „he.  the  reped  „„  i.7,^  ri 
well  knowo  exeeuliou  of  them  b,  Freuch  .l»eer.^d  bri.  K^ 

nrtir;:'''^™'''''"'''«"'«'''-'»»'^"'»-'t',:; 

^,    ,-      »    ""I  lue  priae  oi  ivrance  overcame  her  don'M  *<v 

feee  0,  Europe,  ,..,  .he  repealed  her  de.r«.  withouf. ,u  d  I™ 
quo— without  a  lalvo  for  her  oic«  Jionor.  ' 

Sbe,  therefore,  allege,  on  tbe  faee  of  tbi,  repeal,  that  .u»  ~ 
«.«.«ce  to  Britain  wa.  the  ,oIe  moving  oa„.e,?  wiiWefeurd 
our  r.«^„ce  of  Britain  upon  tbe  preyiou.  repeal  of  *er^e«« 
How  these  «.achroni,m,,  or  eontradiction.  of  date.,  J^t^T 
eoue.  ed  we  eave  .0  tbe  Oallo-Ameriean  eb^nologiltTL  .,1  ta 

But  there  is  a  more  serious  lisht  in  whirh  ihi.  *  ■  ^  **"' 
viewed,  and  if  the  deeiaration  of^^ra^red  I  r  fcraTL? 
ted  our.,ealoo„e,,  .urely  thi,  event  of  the  eoineident,a„d  kte  »»d 

that  *e>relr  repeal  Jil^'ZlJJZLT^Z^-ZZl 
Amenca,  war  would  be  declared  by  Mr.  Madison  «ai„.f  Z' 
Bntam-i/a  copy  of  hi,  war  me„age,  and  an  a„ZZ,  „f7 

Wa.p,  wh..h  «  now  .n  Frauec;  why,  every  man  will  pereCe 


,     igj|lj||(lilJUltTg>p^ 


Vlll 


ilutt  B«iHiparte  might  very  $afdy  repeal  hit  Berlin  and  Milan  de< 
•rec*— beeaote  those  decreet  naly  forbade  our  trade  with  Ehigland, 
and  a  war  between  ui  and  her  would  do  that  much  more  effectual- 
ly. Now  we  do  not  say  that  thi$  wa»  the  ease ;  but  we  do  nay  that 
it  would  not  be  more  extraordinary  than  Mr.  Maditton's  conduct  in 
the  eate  we  have  ju«t  considered,  in  declaring  ihc  French  decrees 
repealed  six  months  before  our  common  master  now  say  they  were 
crer  pretended  so  to  be. 

Bat  there  is  a  collateral  fact  which  puts  this  question,  in  my 
»pinion,  at  rest.  Mr.  Barlow  did  tell  an  American  gentleman  in 
Paris,  in  May  last,  thirty  days  before  the  declaration  of  war  in 
this  country,  that  war  was,  or  would  be  declared  immediately  by 
America  against  Great  Britain ;  and  advised  him  to  regulate  his 
concerns  accordingly ;  and  that  gentleman  did  write  to  his  friends 
in  Salem  to  take  measures  for  his  exchange  in  case  he  should  be 
taken  prisoner  on  his  return.  This  looks  serious ! !  How  did 
Mr.  Barlow,  in  France,  know  this  fact  last  May,  when  we  private 
eitix^  had  no  suspicion  of  it,  in  this  country^  The  answer 
will  be  found  in  onr  succeeding  pages — by  the  same  means  by 
whieli  Armstrong,  in  France,  predicted  the  embargo,  sixty  days 
before  it  was  proposed  here-<-by  a  secret  understanding  between 
onr  administration  and  that  of  France.  There  is  an  end  then  to 
this  mystery.  The  decrees  which  were  to  be  fundamental  laws 
0f  the  empire  expire.  Why  ?  Has  the  emperor's  purpose  chang- 
ed P  No—America  having  declared  war  at  his  order,  there  is  no 
longer  any  nation  on  whom  they  can  operate.  Who  ever  doubted 
^lat  they  would  be  repealed  as  to  us  when  wc  should  declare  war 
jigainst  England  ?  and  we  see  them  so  admirably  well  timsd 
i|S  to  reach  this  country  amidst  the  roar  of  cannon  and  in  the  hor- 
rors of  war. 

Bat  there  are  one  or  two  other  stilF  more  interesting  questions 
arising  out  of  the  late  intelligence;  What  will  be  the  conduct  of 
Great  Britain  in  consequence  of  this  queer  sort  of  ex  post  facto 
repeal  of  the  French  decrees ;  this  declaration,  that  they  have 
been  repealed  during  the  last  year,  when  they  have  been  much  more 
effectually  enforced  than  at  first  ?  Will  she  consider  this  repeal  % 
(eoupled  as  it  is  with  the  declaration  every  moment  falsified  hy  the 


I  »«'j5«r;»t"* '  "r">  •»•"*•■■  -j^ 


iiid  Milan  de< 
with  England, 
nore  eff'eotual- 
we  (/o  say  that 
iin's  conduct  in 
^reneh  decrees 
•ay  they  wcra 

lestion,  in  my 
gentleman  in 
lion  of  war  in 
nmediately  by 
a  regnlate  his 
I  to  hi«  friends 
lie  should  be 
I ! !  How  did 
lien  we  private 
The  answer 
Eime  means  by 
y«),  sixty  days 
iiding  between 
in  end  then  to 
iamental  laws 
lurpose  chang- 
er, there  is  no 
a  ever  doubted 
d  declare  w^ar 
ly  well  timsd 
md  in  the  hor- 

iting  questions 
the  conduct  of 
'  ex  post  facto 
hat  they  have 
een  much  more 
er  this  repeal ; 
falsified  by  the 


"£,«••"  "yoSer.  of  .cc.m».d.li.BP  **"  '*"'"' 

two  upon  «neh  of  thcin  Thi.  ».  P'"'"™',  '•  "T  »  wwd  w 
«.»  of  .he  order,  i.  l.eU  t.  7Ii  ,7.,°  ■!'"''. ""'  "»  '"^ 
they  .h.„ld  he  r.p«Ued.  bZ'.hTJ^  t  '°'"^''  "™  * 
.Me  ,v.  ,h„„ld  dare  to  md.e  S ^JZ "7, ^  "••"'«-.»«•*•.  i. 
for  Franee  .o„>d  i„  .ha.  ...e  J;"; I^    l^  rrll"'?^ 

In  Ihe  hr..  plaee  then,  if  Great  Britain  ihonM  riZ-lT^' 
ler.  upon  thi.  „™„i.al  er  po^  faOo  deel^Ti^Tr  T    • 

-ouM  ^  a  pr«,f  of  her  .trie.  ..t.iti.„  TheTp^Ll   T'  - 
he  recolleeted,  that  this  ««»«•«.    «i.    /i  •! T  f™""'®**    '*  must 
be  the  result  ^f  her  .1.  .ITaS  Jal' '.^  L"""  T"  """ 
engagement,,  «,d  „„.  the  effec.  of  o„rt  ,^  "'""•S»nl«o  her 

«nidn..hav.heent„.™ifG::f°:ita::''"  ""■"•""    "'""'  ' 

enslaved,  and  humiliated  world  Hnf!.!  *'^^'^"'".'»*^  t"«J«  ^  •« 
cree  of  France  of  so  JZti^yT:^:^^^^^^^^^^  ^  -^  '!^" 
operation,  and  which  assigns  on  the  fTBoXl^''^^^  '"  '^ 
to  her  and  to  us  j   that  is    thit  aJJ    I  J    ''^"°  '"  *°*"*""S 

:irr±?t?S^l---C^ 


"^         •  ■        •         ''  <»  \l 


A-iends  of  our  administration,  should  see  throogli  the  tWn  veil « i(h 
which  this  transaction  Ik  covered,  if  they  should  say,  "that  al- 
though opposed  to  the  orders  in  council,  yet  when  we  see  it  avow 
ed  on  the /ace  of  the  repeal  of  the  Freceh  decrees,  that  they  are  re- 
pealed -nereiy  because  America  resisted  our  orders  in  council,  our 
honour  HorUds  our  acquiescing  in  such  signal  injustice,"  what 
would  our  i^dministrution  say  ?  What  ought  all  honest  men  to  say  ? 
Ouught  they  not  to  say.  ihU  is  a  shameful  intrigue  with  France,  and 
does  not  in  the  smallest  degree  vjiry  the  merits  of  the  original  ques- 
tion, as  ta  th«  decrees  of  France,  orders  of  Britain  ? 

But  suppose  a  ministry  not  p'ed.^d  to  support  the  orders  in  coun- 
«il,  but  avowedly  opposed  to  them,  should,  as  it  is  possible  they 
may  overlook  the  insulting  reasons  assigned  by  France  for  the  late, 
the  very  late  repeal  of  her  decrees,  should  bona  fide  and  absolutely 
rescind  the  orde«)  ia  council.  Would  our  cabinet  instantly  pro- 
pose or  assent  to  peace  ?  It  could  not  be  said  that  war  is  now  un- 
dertaken, and  we  must  in  honor  ccntead  for  our  other  smaller 
pretensions,  because  in  the  supposed  case,  Britain  will  have  with- 
*uawn  he-  orders  before  she  kmw  of  the  war. 

Shall  we  then  continue  at  war  to  maintain  our  doctrine  as  tp 
impressments,  and  to  force  Britain  to  give  up  her  system  of  par- 
tial blockade  ?  If  we  do,  then  it  will  be  manifest,  that  we  go  to 
war  for  points  which  Mr.  Madison  himself  in  his  arrangemeu' 
with  Mr.  Erskine  did  not  include,  and  which  he  thereby  declared 
ne  thought  wove  not  violations  of  our  neutral  rights.  In  short, 
then,  it  will  be  manifest,  that  *he  war  is  undertaken  not  for  our  in- 
terests, hvt  for  those  of  France. 


he  mn  veil  with 
J  say,  "that  «,!- 
I  we  see  it  avow* 
Lat  they  are  re- 
i  in  council,  our 
injustice,"  what 
le^t  men  to  say  ? 
vith  France,  and 
lie  original  ques- 

« 

6  orders  in  coun^ 
s  possible  they 
nee  for  the  late, 
B  and  absolutely 
t  instantly  pro- 
war  is  now  un- 
other  smaller 
tvill  have  with- 

r  doctrine  as  tt* 
■  system  of  par- 

that  we  go  to 
lis  arrangemen*' 
lereby  declared 
tts.     In  short, 

not  for  our  in- 


AK 


INQUIRY,  &c. 


of  my  native  StaCa  si^^e  ^ZI^X^  '"  ,*'  ''^g'^t'"^ 
by  having  beeii  the  place  of  ^     ??•''''?''>' ^^^"''O'ls. 
ashes  of  ray  reveredSr«,^   I  ^"1'^'  ''^  «>«t^ning  the 
rations,  by^Z^tTtu^-^"^  ^^ successively! 
own  aid  ^.h^rSl JtS  TJTT  "^  *"  f™'"  ^7 
State  ray  childrenryet  hiX^'^^^ff^  PnMperity  of  «-hic& 
hopes  of  future  success     ThSl  ^''^'  ^"^  ^  tWr 
.created  an  attaehmen?^  rtJ^c'^Z^'f'^^'^  '"'ve 
in  power,  nor  the  temporanr^H  I  hi       ^  ^'™'  "^  •»» 
tunes,  into  which  ou?S  Tr^  \^^  ^mediable  misfor- 
essentially  weaken  or^iwirTh.      k  ^""^^  -*'  «« 
me  in  ray  capacity  of  a  E?»,      ^  °^*  .administered  to 

MassachLtt^sTs,Ldo?rt&,;,r.:  "")?*  *'  State  of 

and  independent  Stale-It.dfcj;^;'''^'  "'r^^gn. 

fore  an  assembled  people  andl^th  °^*'  ^aken  be. 

preme  Beins  I  conS^;  !'        ?  }^  presence  of  the  Su. 

"Phold,  a.d  maiSn  the  .fZ**  ^^T^^  *«  '  '-i"  defenS, 

againstal.  W.a«"i^atev.r  'S  ft'*"^  "'"'« 
of  mdifference,  whether  ih?  ■.ft„„k  l  o  rae,  it  is  a  matter 

directly  and  openS™  the  ^^,  "^  ""eserights  proceeds 
•ny  of  all  civilized  S™eso?  wh«h'^t!;'"'''=<''""'°»«"«=- 

through  the  partiality  or  the  raiS«nf.1, """"-"  ^  "^^ 
maJ'^'-!*"  -f  -  -      •<  "*  ""^  mistakes  of  the  m^n  «.k 

iil-CAed  pZcr!""™'  "^^   unfortunately  elev^erto 


-„..J>.™,(t-.. 


( 


Jt  is  my  object  in  the  following  remarks  to  shew,  that 
whether  the  influence  of  France,  directly  or  indirectly  ap, 
plied,  or  whether  the  mistaken  policy  of  our  administration, 
without  such  influence,  has  occasioned  our  difficulties,  the 
measures  lately  adopted  by  a  small  majority  of  our  national 
rulers  are  not  only  without  reasonable  justification,  an4 
destructive  of  our  best  interests  and  dearest  rights,  but 
are  a  misapplication  of  the  powers  entrusted  to  them ; 
and  therefore  it  belongs  to  us,   the  people,  to  decide 
whether  such  measures  deserve  our  approbation  and  sup- 
port, or  whether  they  will  justify  us  in  a  temperate  but 
firm  and  decided  opposition— Whether,  :n  short,  the  evils, 
which  are  certain  an^  inevitable  from  a  support  of  the 
present  policy,'  are  not  infinitely  greater  in  extent  th?»n  any 
which  we  could  possibly  mcur  by  a  constitutional  and  rcr 
?olute  resistance.     Let  not  the  timid  be  alarmed  at  the  outr 
set,  by  the  idea  of  open  resistance,  of  insurrection,  of 
unjustifiable  opppsitipn,     I  contemplate  no  such  measures, 
I  have  in  view  only  those  constitutional  principles  which 
the  usages  of  our  ancestors,  both  in  Great-Britain  and  ii^ 
this  country,  and  their  successful  example,  have  sanctioned. 
I  ask  pnly  for  the  application  of  the  principles  of  Mr. 
Locke,  an^  for  the  imitation  of  the  example  of  those  great 
men  who  have  gone  before  us,  in  cases  of  smaller  pressure, 
and  of  less  importance  to  the  vital  interests  of  dieir  country, 
Having  made  rtiese  general  oJDservations,  I  sjiall  state  the 
particular  prder  of  my  remarks,  which  will  be. 

First,  a  candid  examination  of  Mr.  Madison's  manifesto 
to  Congress,  which  impelled  thaj;  body  reluctantly  to  the 
declaration  of  an  offensive  wa.'  against  Great  Britain, 
^  Under  this  head,  I  shall  consider  the  various  allegations 
pf  I^r.  Madison  against  Qreat-Britain,  and  I  shall  shew, 
th^t^  the  charges  are  greatly  exaggerated,  apd  that  they 
might  ail  of  them,  xvihout  exception,  have  been  healed  and 
a4«sted,  if  the  administration  of  our  country  had  been  disr 
posed  so  to  dor-that  these  causes  of  complaint  have  not 
only  be  en  suffered  to  fester  and  spread,  but  that  they  have 
been  irritated  in  complaisance  or  at  least  in  conformity  witji 
the  e:^p  ectations  and  wishes  of  1  nuice. 


shew,  that 
lirectly  ap, 
linistration, 
iculties,  the 
3ur  national 
cation,  an(J 
rights,  but 
i  to  them  I 

to  decide 
)n  and  sup- 
nperate  but 
rt,  the  evils, 
>port  of  the 
;nt  th?»n  any 
ionalandrer 
J  at  the  6utr 
irrection,  of 
;h  measvirest 
jiples  which 
ritain  and  i^ 
?  sanctioned, 
iples  of  Mr. 
f  those  great 
Her  pressure, 
iieir  country, 
ijiiall  state  the 

[I's  manifesto 
itantly  to  the 
Britain, 
js  allegations 
[  shall  shew, 
pd  that  they 
en  healed  and 
had  been  dis- 
laint  have  not 
liat  they  have 
nformitv  with 


Secondly,  I  shall  consider  the  expediency  of  the  war, 
both  upon  the  supposition  of  its  being  successful  and  un- 
successful. 

Thirdly,  I  shall  contend,  that  if  the  administration  have 
contemplated  a  war  against  Great-Britain  for  several  months 
past,  (and  no  new  cause  of  irritation  exists  against  her 
which  has  not  existed  for  five  years,)  it  was  their  solemn 
duty  to  have  made  preparations  for  it,  by  providing  an  ad- 
equate marine  force  in  order  to  protect  our  commerce  now 
exposed  without  relief  to  the  depredations  of  our  powerful 
enemy-*-by  permitting  the  return,  and  facilitating  by  every 
means  the  restoration  to  our  countr}-^  of  all  the  property  of 
our  citizens  abroad — by  warning  the  merchants  of  the  in- 
tentions of  tlitf  government,  and  thus'  preventing  the  enor- 
mous sacrifices  which  will  inevitably  be  made  in  conse- 
quence of  their  ignorance  of  such  secret  hostile  intentions 
and  purposes. 

Fourthly,  I  shall  shew  thrt  in  a  war,  offensively  and  tm- 
justly  undertaken,  the  subject  is  not  only  not  bound  to  en- 
gage, but  that  it  is  his  duty  to  abstain  from  taking  a  part 
in  it. 

Lastly,  I  shall  point  out  the  legal  and  constitutional 
remedy  to  which  the  citizens  may  and  ought  to  resort  in 
this  calamitous  case  of  misconduct  in  a  small  majority  of 
their  rulers. 

When  I  first  read  the  manifesto  of  the  President  against 
Great-Britain,  I  confess  that  it  was  difficult  for  me  to  de- 
cide which  feeling  was  most  predominant  in  my  mind, 
mortification  or  indignation.  Mortification,  that  our  nation 
should  be  disgraced  in  the  eyes  of  the  whole  world  and 
of  posterity  by  siv^h  a  tissue  of  exaggerations — and  indig- 
nation, that  artifices  of  this  sort  should  be  resorted  to  in 
order  to  deceive  and  irritate  the  people,  and  to  drive  them 
into  a  ruinous  war  of  an  offensive  nature,  and  (what  is  still 
more  to  be  feared)  into  an  alliance  with  France,  which  is 
more  dreadful  than  a  century  of  war.  I  was  astonished  at 
Mr.  Madison's  boldness  and  his  contempt  of  the  under- 
standings and  information  of  the  people,  in  thus  daring  to 
make  a  discolored  and  extravacrant  renresentation  of  events 
and  cu'cunistancc.s  which  have  so  recently  passed  under 


S 


t.  r 


the  eyies  of  the  whole  nation.  I  wais  indeed  prepared  to 
expect  almost  u  j  thing  from  this  author  of  the  cnisade 
against  England — his  proclamation,  declaring  to  the  people 
that  the  French  Berlm  and  Milan  Decrees  were  revoked  on 
the  1st  of  Nofvember,  1810,  when  he  knew  that  France 
had  never  even  promised  to  revoke  them  until  we  should 
*'  cause  our  rights  to  be  respected,"  that  is,  as  Mr.  Madison 
has  since  construed  it,  declare  war  against  Great-Britain^ 
had  opened  my  eyes  in  some  measure  as  to  his  chai^cter — 
I  had  k)st  much  of  my  respect  for  his  political  veracity, 
and  of  my  confidence  in  his  public  assertions^ — His  mes- 
sage with  respect  to  the  pretended  discovery  of  Henry 
confirmed  my  suspicions. 

Instead  of  honorably  acquitting  the  citiatens  of  Boston, 
as  he  ought  to  have  done,  of  any  participation  in  Henry's 
views  or  designs,  he  boldly  asserts,  that  "  Henry  was  em- 
ployed in  intrigues  with  disaffected  citizens  in  the  United 
States,  having  for  their  object  a  subversion  of  our  Gov- 
ernment, and  a  dismemberment  of  the  Union." 

Now  he  well  Icnew  at  the  time  he  penned  that  sentence, 
(and  he  has  since  repeated  the  same  sentence  in  the  mani- 
festo) that  Henry  expressly  declared  that  he  never  opened 
the  subject  of  his  mission  to  any  citizen  of  the  United 
States. 

A  man  capable  of  so  insidious  and  unfounded  an  asper- 
sion on  the  citizens  of  his  own  country,  on  men  who  will 
pot  yield  to  him  in  patriotism  or  spirit,  might  well  be  ex- 
pected to  be  little  scrupulous  about  the  terms  he  might  use 
towards  a  foreign  nation,  especially  when  those  terms  of 
reprc  \ch  fall  in  with  the  passions  of  the  ignorant  part  of 
his  supporters,  whom  it  has  been  the  business  of  their 
leaders  to  inflame  and  to  deceive. 

The  partiality  displayed  in  this  manifesto — the  black 
and  bloody  representation  which  is  therein  made  of  the 
conduct  of  Great-Britain,  precisely  adapted  to  gratify  the 
malice  of  her  deadly  enemy  and  the  e^iemy  of  all  frte 
states-r-and  the  brief,  mild,  and  apologetic  style  with  re- 
spect to  the  wrongs  of  France,  bring  to  my  recollection 
many  events  in  the  history  of  Mr.  Madison's  public  con- 
duct, Vvhich  eombiuc  to  prcdiicc  a  strong  apprciiciision  in 


sd  prepared  to 
of  the  cnisade 
g  to  the  people 
ere  revoked  on 
w  that  France 
itil  we  should 
s  Mr.  Madison 
Great-Britain^ 
lis  chai'acter — 
itical  veracity, 
ns^ — His  mes- 
ery  of  Henry 

ens  of  Boston, 
ion  in  Henry's 
lenry  was  em- 
in  the  United 
1  of  our  Gov- 
n. 


»» 


that  sentence, 
e  in  the  mani- 
I  never  opened 
of  the  l/nited 

ided  an  asper- 
men  who  will 
It  well  be  ex- 
j  he  might  use 
hose  terms  of 
lorant  part  of 
iness  of  their 

to — the  black 
made  of  the 
to  gratify  the 
y  of  all  frte 
style  with  re- 
y  recollection 
s  public  con- 
iprciiciision  ip 


my  mind  that  he  habitually  inclines  to  the  views  and  inter, 
ests  ot  France  more  than  becomes  the  magistrate  of  a  fre» 
and  independent  state.     I  shall  hereafter  shew,  that  his  last 

Tene&T^  "  •  '""r  '\  P^'TP'  ^^^'«  ^^^^^^^^^  for  the 
^^t^.r£ '''''"'  >n/«^^though  it  m^  not  be  in  intention^ 
that  we  can  m  no  fosstble  event  be^iners  by  it,  but  that 
mnn.t '"'i'^''^  ofour  commerce,  our  agriculture,  our 
money,  and  our  lives,  for  no  other  ^ood  tlian  to  make  a 
diversion  of  the  British  forces  favorable  to^r«L  f  and 
perhaps  some  men  M^fartherfto  the  subju^^forof  ttir 

one  of  the  most  alarming  attempts  ever  yet  made  aeainst 

^  ^^  lu'tJu^^  *"  ^^'^'^^"1^  ^^^^'  »**!  satisfy  every  reasonable 

^^^h-JT  T  '^T'''''''  .°"^'  *^'  it  is  undertaken  for 

ord^^fn^Tl  '"^  % <*onformity  with  repeated  Fre^wh 

nroS      f      the  sacrifice  of  our  own  best  interests,  and 

probably  of  our  liberties,  we  shall  have  no  very  great  diffi" 

culty  m  condemning  it.     I  shall  state  nothing  but  wSu 

have  learned  from  unquestionable  authority,  nothing  which 

^^"°i  ^»PPo»"'  by  indisputable  proof.  ^ 

Mr.  Madison  early  in  life  became  a  member  of  the  rev- 

olutionary  Congress.     That  body  was  then  divided  in  o 

^sK^'^'  ^'"^^^  party,  Jf  which  Mr.  Mad  sou 

rffnrfVw  "^  ""-^"^  1^^  ^^'^  ^"  ^^^°^  ^f  »^e"ding  all  the 

th^Xnl'"'^'?  °^.'^^  "°?P^^  to  promote  the  views  of 

n  170?H??  ^"'''  ;^^^^\w»»ich  the  French  government 

tious  designs  of  France."  The  other  party  was  truly 
frnenean,  seeking  only  the  establishment  of  our  national 

nlf  ""^'"^K  """^  ^T^'''^ '  ^'  '^^  ^^^d  of  this  American 
party  were  the  members  from  New-Engkncl.    Mr  Mad  * 

iSuTtforto ' '"  P^^^^  who  proposfd  and  ^riedth'; 
instructions  to  our  mmisters  abroad  not  to  make  any 
peace  without  the  consent  and  concurrence  of  France.     He 

Str.1„??- ^!;<>  W-<^  the  treaty  of  peace' 
uuuc  .,^  '•"'  "«/  ««uivir.  -aoams,  and  w|i..    '*  compli- 


it 


.i- 


8 

ance  with  the  wishes  of  France,  attempted  a  censure  upoii 
those  ministers  for  having  dared  to  negociatfe  a  mosi  adJ 
vantage6us  and  honorable  treaty  without  the  concurrence 
or  consent  of  the  French  cabinet.     Such  were  Mr.  Madi- 
son's early  predilections  j  such  was  the  promise  which  he 
presented  of  his  future  policy.     After  the  establishment  of 
the  present  constitution,   Mr.  Madison  again  came  into 
the  councils  of  our  nation.     We  there  again  find  him  true 
to  his  first  opinions,  and  resolutely  bent  to  promote  the 
measures  wliich  favored  the  views  and  interests  of  France. 
In  1794,  he  was  one  of  those  who  strenuously  opposed 
tien.  Washington's  pacific  mission  to  Great-Britain  ;  he 
was  m  favor,  as  he  is  njw,  of  direct  hostility  with  that 
kingdom,  in  favor  of  the  seq^festration  of  British  property, 
jn^  opposed  to  every  measure  which  could  heal  the  breach 
between  the  two  countries. 

In  the  same  year  he  brought  forward  his  famous  re- 
solutions  against  Great-Britain,  the  whole  scope  and  ob- 
ject of  which  were  to  make  a  warfare  on  British  commerce, 
and  to  please  the  revolutionary  rulers  of  France.     They 
were  m  their  character  precisely  like  Bonaparte's  conti- 
nental  system,  and  like  the  corresponding,  cooperating 
measures  of  embargo  and  non-intercourse,  so  ineffectually 
yet  so  ruinously  attempted  by  Mr.  Jefferson  and  himself 
m  later  periods  of  our  history.     It  was  Mr.  Madison  who 
wrote  the  pamphlet  against  the  author  of  "War  in  Dis- 
guise,"  in  which  he  arraigned  with  great  severity  the 
British  doctpine  as  to  the  colonial  trade-     Yet  we  have  seen 
ttus  same  man,  within  three  years  after,  apologize  for  the 
drench  decrees  as  merely  municipai  regulations,  of  which 
the  United  States,  he  says,  have  no  right  to  complain,  al- 
though  these  decrees  cut  up  by  the  roots  th^t  very  colonial 
trade,  for  which,  while  Great-Britain  was  concerned,  he 
had  been  so  strenuous  and  warm  an  advocate,     lliis  gen- 
tleman, so  acrimonious  against  Great-Britain  for  modifying 
me  manner  in  which  we  should  carry  the  produce  of 
French  colonies  to  the  parent  country,  who  represented  it 
as  of  vital  importance  to  the  United  States— at  a  subsequent 
period  when  France  not  only  saw  fit  to  cut  off  all  this  car- 
rying uade  to  her  own  country,but  to  march  her  armies  into 


d  a  censure  lipori 
;ociatfc  a  inosi  ad-J 
the  concurrence 
were  Mr.  Madi- 
)romise  which  he 
:  establishment  of 
again  came  into 
ain  find  him  true 
to  promote  the 
iv^rests  of  France, 
luously  opposed 
reat-Britain  ;  he 
stility  with  that 
British  property, 
i  heal  the  breach 

L  his  famous  re- 
;  scope  and  ob- 
itish  commerce, 
France.  They 
naparte's  conti- 
ig,  cooperating 

so  ineffectually 
Jon  and  himself 
•.  Madison  who 

"War  in  Dis- 
at  severity  the 
et  we  have  seen 
)ologize  for  the 
ionsj  of  which 

0  complain,  al- 
it  very  colonial 

concerned,  he 
te.     'Hiis  gen- 

1  for  modifying 
the  produce  of 
'  represented  it 
It  a  subsequent 
off  all  this  car- 
rier armies  into 


to  acouiesnTr*^  ™«<*fri«/ states,  not  only  was  ot^^ 
ablesbvereignTvr'  '"^^^^"'^  «'''<*=fae  of  unquestlon- 

situated  like  hS  h^f  .^n  Tl"?*^  of  aU  ofe  states 
Victor  hasanKtLSl^"-™'*?'  ^^«^ 
.oppressed  anrneuttal  S5^Kin *^J^ those 
condemn,  as  Mr.  MafcS  do«  G^El"^.  "^d 
hibitme:  a  trade  with  h^n  ^^  *  weat^Bntain  for  nro- 

Fr^ncef  whots  bffot  ttrS^:^  r!.n''P'¥^'^ 
of  neutral  mid  friLilh,  cfo*  **™J  ^^^^  us  off  from  the  ti^e 

to  come  out  ai.d  electa  w^^/^jj^^i^,  "«  Ndnass 
before  lie  dared  to  tellThis  St  ?- k  ?''*  °^  *^^°'*' 
las  done)  tliat  their  fortunS  S  hi  l^^  ft"  "?^W?»  he 
.  attached  to  tlwse  of  SSrS  IS  .w'^^"  "PsepaiaMy 
to  the  chariot  wheels  oT^^U^'  ^  "^'  V^  """st  be  tied 
<=ntry  into  his  «JpSj  *"  '°"'1""=^'»-  i"  his  triumplS 

that&':^^-^t7^dec.aratio„  to  Mr.  Randolph, 

sand  other  incid"  aLI.T'"'''^ '''" '"'^  "  *«>- 
that  his  opinionsld  ht  S'^^^  ^*"e  *<>*«% 
'^•A  those  of  his  new  ally.  CaLrt?        '""'''  "^^^^^ 

J  now  proceed  to  the  consideration  of  his  manifest^  tf 

doctrine  and  P'acTeTt^t/A't^^  '°  **  Bri&h 
our  merrhanf  .k:__      ",   ?^'ng..their  own  seamen  out  nf 

"""■"s  "'"'"■    ™"'^<^?e<=ted  under  Uiisih,i^,",4 


(' 


10 

'the  .virulent  remarks  which  the  obscure  writers  of  hisp^rtf 
have  used  for  many  years  past.  Before  I  con»der  his  as- 
sertions on  this  point,  it  may  be  useful  to  trace  the  history 
of  this  pretension  and  practice  on  the  part  of  Great  Britain. 
M^  All  tiic  naUons  of  Europe  maintain  without  any  excep- 
tion this  doctrine,  **that  their  subjects  have  no  right  to 
.expatriate  themselves,  and  that  tlie  nation  1ms  a  right  to 
the  services  of  all  its  citizens,  especially  in  time  of  war." 
Tltts  doctrine  is  not  only  maintained  and  enforced  by  all 
sovereign  states,  but  it  is  explicitly  laid  down  by  wnt^ 
ongeiiCTal  law,  as  most  unquestionable.  "  | 

Grotius,  Yattel,  Puffendorf,  and  all  other  public  writers, 
concur  in  maintainmg  this  right.  France  Has  a  special  code 
on  1^  subkct,  and  every  citizen  is  enrolled  from  the  time 
lie  is  capable  of  bearing  arms,  and  is  recalled  by  special 
proclamation,  as  soon  as  a  war  breaks  out,  froiu  the  service 
pflprei^  countries.  J'       V; 

Benm^k,  on  entering  into  the  present  wair^  issued  a 
similar  proclamation.  There  is  no  civilized  country  on 
the^plobe  which  does  not  claim  the  right  to  th?  service  of 
all  its  citizens  in  time  of  war. 

Whdi  the  >var  broke  out  between  Great-Britain  arid 
Franpe,  in  1793,  a  new  case  arose — a  case  unexampled  in 
the  histpry  of  natiQns,    America,  once  a  part  of  the  British 
empire,    speaking  the  same  language,  na,ving  the   same 
habits^  occupied  m  the  same  pursuits,  remained  a^  peiace. 
The  profits  of  neutrality  enabled  us  to  pay  greater  wages  to 
our  seamen  than  Britain  could  possibly  afford.    The  British 
sejimen  who  had  never  befqre  been  tempted  to  dv  i^rt  ^e 
standard  of  their  country,  because  die  language,  habits  and 
usages  of  the  coiitmental  nations  were  so  diverse  and  disa- 
greeable to  them,  flocked  by  thousands  into  the  Americian 
mercantile  service,  and  produced  a  serious  and  distressing 
injury  to  Great-Bntain.    It  is  the  opinbn  of  well-inform^ed 
merchants,  that  thirty  or  forty  thousand  British  seamen 
sought  emjJoyment  in  American  ships.     Great-Britain 
found  this  evil  intolerable,  and  she  adopted  the  expedient 
cf  reclaiming  her  own  seamen  found  in  our  merchant 
«grvice ;  disclainung,  however,  most  explicitly,  the  right  to 
take  them  from  our  public  armed  ships. 


11 

r  ^r'^.P'^^^'^^^  s^^  commenced  under  the  arfm;n;«*«.*- 

Moa  ot  taking  "Jmeriean"  seamen ;  and  if  the  en*.  feL 
SlT/^""  "nft.quen.ly  occur^edr^e  hafd^  ,^ 
pressed  her  regr«,  and  has  restored  the  men  so  toU.  ^, 
due  and  proper  proof  of  their  citizenshL  ^'"'  "" 

the  l^flfcrv' "»».  b«en  of  y«y  limited  extent,  and 
Si  tSolai^    tS"m'T"  &""=  •>«"  *«  l«»tdispos- 

have  known  several  mercliants  in  *.vf!.«o^^u  V^'        ,* 

s,*fe^'r"  *"^"^-  ^^  ^^~4".° 

befl^'J^ett  i«o  Mr  ^"' .™P°'^"«  «°  be  considered 

Mr.  Adams  thought  thU  nltS^nf  S5  ^?''''"'g«™  hor 
make  it  the  <!..hi»TI:f         •  .     "' s"™Cfnt  importance  to 

much  le«  A"  1?  f-r'  <""»™«"'<=*'°"  to  Congress, 
mucniess  did  they  think  it  reasonab  e  canst  of  war  *ft  u 

a  well-known  fact  also  diat  Great-BritaiSS  t^         » ' 
more-and^ore  cautious  in  SSlSom^^KfW^ 
chiming  her  «;amen,  and  fewer  ins^cea  orimp^sl^ 
fee     wt  r*'"K  ^'-  Madison's  adminis^^E 

F^ter  tli  SrW^'  '"If  '^^  "^'"^  '«"  "»"«1  to,  Mr" 
r^reter,  the  British  ambassador,  requested  our  ewemmei>j 

Amerii^rt  t  "'^T^^  -r  «>  <=»"KrsS:2 

Americms,  that  he  might  procure  the  r  immediate  releasT 

f^™  ;         ^^''g«^nt  and  neutral  nation  speak  thesime 
anguage,  and  have  the  same  genml  character     Th-T^^ 
Wnt  warns  her  citizens  forV  def™«  ^;reIuL^i' 
Jl^e  neutral  wants  them  for  pro6t_The  neuM  oSao 
dolto  per  month,  and  the  blligerent  can  Xri  butTs^! 

^trfjdTmpl:;:!  "^"^  ^^  -«<="  ^  '^^ 

suWects'^an'ISf ?  '''"'""'  *'.  "^  '"  ■^<='''*'»  ^  <»vn 
subjects,  and  so  fir  as  respects  them  she  is  risht  •    she  i. 

supported  by  the  law  of  nations,  but  in  the  eXu,  TrtKlf 

J^^igat  instances  ot  mistakes  or  misconduct  willojcur  T  oli^ht 


f 


the  neutral  to  complain  unle^  she  takc§  eflfectual  measui^ 
to  prevent  t^  entry  of  the  seamen  of  the  bdjigerent  into 
her  service?  Much  .leas  ought  s^  to  compbiij,  if  she  en- 
tices l^  high  rewards  and  countenances  by  fraudulent  pro- 
tections such  seamen  of  ^e.  belligerent  in  desertinir  Oie 
standard  of  their  country.    1  *  ^ 

Yet  such  is  the  iact,  well  known  to  every  man  on  t^ 
sen  coast-rfMaryland^  North-Carolina,  SoutS-Carolina, 
Georgia,  employ  three  foreign  seamen  to  one  American  I 
Yet  these  are  the  men  from  whom  our  complaints  proceed ! 

Nor  is  this  allt— our  government  give  occasion  to  th^  very 
complaint  of  which  they  make  so  much  parade.     It  is  a   . 
f4Ct,^  acknowledged  by  our  marine  officers,  that  a  large  pro" 
J)ortion  of  the  seamen  in  some  of  our  national  ships  are  na- . 
tive  British  seanien,  and  it  is  even  asserted  that  many  of  the 
w%rant  officers  are  of  that  description, 

Van  a  government,  which  at  least  does  not  check  such 
abuses,  such ,  an  attack  on  the  resources  of  a  belligerent, 
sucl;»  an  important  inroad  on  his  rights,  legitimately  comv 
plaiii  of  his  occasional  abuse  of  the  undoubted  power  of  re^ 
claiming  his  own  citizens  ? 

Much  less  can  such  men  fairly  hold  a  moral  and  pathetic 
dilcourse  on  the  cruelty  of  compelling  men  to  fight 
against  their  brethren,  when  they  know  that  British  subjects 
are  first  seduced  from  their  allegiance,  and  then  compelled 
to  turn  their  arms  against  their  sovereign  and  fellow  subt 
jeets. 

Yet  such  is  the  fact-— Vast  numbers  of  British  seamen 
w^  be  now  ordered  out  by  the  President  to  slaughter  the 
subiects  of  their  own  sovereign,  and  if  captured  will  be 
liable  to  be  hung  as  traitors  to  their  king  and  country,* 

Mr.  Madison,  in  his  manifesto  in  favor  of  war,  says,  that 
the  British  government  have  assumed  a  jurisdiction  on  the 
high  seas  instead  of  a  resort  to  the  responsible  sovereign, 
whidi  he  would  have  us  believe  would  have  been  effectual, 
ButTiave  not  the  British  government  repeatedly  complain^ 
ed  to  ours  of  the  abuses  which  have  existed  as  to  the  en- 5^ 
^cement  and  eiiUstment  of  their  seamen,  and  has  the  r^?- 


.»1i-     an   v. 


J!_» 


tiffea  \|ieoattse  he  would  not  wolate  his  oath  of  ^Uegianee.  " 


Tias  tarrea  ana  feu|U- 


ual  n>easui^ 
Pigjcrent  Mitof.^ 
[J,  if  she  en* 
iudulentpro" ,  . 
desertinir  the 

man  on  $hP 
ith-Carolina^ 

I  American  I 

nts  proceed ! 

m  to  the  very 

ide.     It  is  a 

talargepro" 

ships  are  na- . 

;  many  of  th^ 

t  check  such 

belligerent, 

mately  cpm- 

power  of  re^ 

and  pathetic 
len  to  fight 
itish  subjects 

:n  compelled  J 
I  fellow  sii^t , 


itish  seamen 
ilaughter  the 
ired  will  be 
:ountty,* 
ar,  says,  that 
iction  on  the 
fe  sovemgn, 
een  efiectuaU 
ly  complain-^ 
as  to  the  en 
1  has  the  n?< 


'** 


itarreaauafeu^u- 


*A«Wa*»«'i^fl«iUirited  Slates.  eytfOMiA  ,fc««  . 

wmS  h2  ^  ^  •'^"?"  "*  seduction  of  Bnfid,^!^ 
th^they  ha'Tj. '^"™"'  *°  UK^marhie?   We  know 

pare  this  W^''S'S-"  "  *^'  ^*?*''  P™'^''''  «o  -^o™- 
j"  ^  "".'"^?*  •n"'  the  seamen  ought  to  be  carrie.!  in  fij 

wotlw  ttTviat  rMri'uW  It  be'  ^""'^  f ' 

Much  is  sad  by  Mr    MacU^nn  nf' ♦£  •  •       ^  . 

ciuzens.     ihis  is  very  pretty  rhetoric  •  hut  o»5n  •♦  -       7P 

:;  and  expostulations;  ra  th"?;  W  VS^oTmS 
W^mms  wWchcouldnotbereje^teTif  Lre^^^^ 

l*^.'™'':^!"!!?.?^''-  -™^"-  Now  fhtis:^: 

5a  fts  P^'s^s^orthr^Su  to's^^L'^lt^"  '"'' 


t 

I 


14 

Ttwi  whole  number  of  sailors  pretended  to  have  been  im- 
pressed from  our  ships  for  fifteen  years  past  was  6258,  out 
of  70,000,  and  ot  wnich  all  but  1500  have  been  restored. 
Of  tMs  remainder,  at  least,  one  half  are  probably  British 
seamen,  and  of  the  residue  it  is  probable  that  at  least  another 
moiety  entered  voluntarily.  It  appears  however  from^  the 
returns  that  not  more  thain  lilOO  seamen,  including  British 
subjects  with  fraudulent  American  protections,  were  at  any 
one  moment  in  British  enwloy. 

The  whole  number  ol  British  seamen  in  their  marine^,  or 
puh^c  ships  ontify  is  150,000,  and  in  their  merchant  ships, 
over  whom  they  have  a  perfect  control,  240,000.  Is  it 
probable,  we  ask,  that  for  the  sake  of  gaining  1500  seamen, 
they  Would  hazard  the  peace  of  their  country  ?  It  must  then 
be  that  the  reason  why  they  insist  upon  this  right  is,  that 
they  would  wish  to  check  the  disposition  of  their  own 
seamen  to  enter  into  our  service,  of  wliom,  it  is  admitted  on 
all  hands,  we  have  at  least  from  30  to  50,000. 

But,  says  Mr.  Madison,  our  proposition  to  arrange  this 
affair  on  reasonable  terms  passed  without  notice. 

This  is  a  most  unfounded  assertion-— It  is  a  fact  that  both 
during  the  embassy  of  Mr.  King  and  of  Mr.  Monroe,  the 
Britasb  government  manifested  a  disposition  to  arrange  this 
dispute  m  a  manner  satisfactory  to  both  countries. 

And  Mr.  Monroe  explicitly  states,  that  Lords  Holland 
«id  Auckland  had  proposed  to  him  the  basis  of  an  arrange- 
ment which  they  were  ready  to  make  on  that  subject,  and 
which  he  believed  would  be  satbfectory  to  the  two  coun- 
tries. 

On  this  point  then,  Mr.  Madison's  representations  are 

cattremely  unfair  and  unreasonable. 
.  Such  is  the  true  and  well  known  picture  of  the  question 
of  impressment,  which  Mr.  Madison  presents  in  the  fore 
ground,  as  if  it  was  of  primary  importanc>.,  and  the  princi- 
pqlcause  of  the  late  declaration  of  war. 

Yet  this  evil,  such  as  it  is,  is  of  seventeen'  years  duration, 
and  was  much  more  extensive  in  its  actual  operation  when 
the  illustrious  V/ashington  signed  and  ratified  Mr.  Jay  *s 
iKatv  thaoa  it  is  U'^w 


;/«#' 


"y«!,«".^v,*e  -rt*a*3^  ji«»,s*.-^^-^V*.>fe4|.iftJ, 


tiave  been  im- 
wm  6258,  out 
been  restored, 
obably  British 
t  least  another 
rever  from  the 
hiding  British 
ks,  were  ait  any 

wir  marine,  or 
lerchant  ships, 
40,000.  Is  it 
;  1500  seamen, 
?  It  must  then 
,s  right  is,  that 
of  their  own 
is  admitted  on 
X 

to  arrange  this 
tice, 

a  fact  that  both 
*.  Monroe,  the 
to  arrange  this 
ntries. 

Lords  Holland 

i  of  an  arrange- 

at  subject,  and 

the  two  coun- 

resentations  are 

of  the  question 
ents  in  the  fore 
and  the  princi- 

years  duration, 
operation  when 
;ified  Mr.  Jay*» 


■r   a. 

u 

Tf  ?^'  ^°  ""'  '»'»«w  mean  to  leave  the  quesrion  heri- 

very  snips,  and  against  those  verv  brefhreW  a^A  ♦«  •  "T^ 

WnT  nffi.  .-  .  J  "•  so  cordial  an  execratioh  of  these 
of  ,W.  T°"?'*  ""*'  sympathetic  measures  in  the  breasts 
kfndiS^.""'"  ""'^  "^  P'^^-'^d  'o  >«  tl.e  objectsoAht 

inl^^fl^  "'*"  ^'  ^  ~"«?«'"  i*  a  •"•x^kery  of  (he  suffer, 
ings  of  the  merchants  and  the  sailor.  rr.r  .h.  l>,i  =>'"'er^ 

avowed  enemies  of  commercea„1'S^:^aSmeTr«:^ 

f'^r   *°  T- *5u"°"*  ""'''^■•the  pretence  of  supporSng 

-  comr .  rcial  rights  andof  vindicrting  the  wronraof  thf 

..lerohants  and  sailors.    The  merchants  and  sauSweSr 

are  not  deceived  by  such  prelensions-They  tnZ^e 

deep  hostility  of  the  men 'who  propose  suT^  sl^toaS 

r;^r::iK':!r^i!2«^L-??''^y4"5erthesemS.ir» 

io„s-anda5^g;;5y*;s™^^^^^ 


disposition  to  afford  them  redress,  a  redress  v^mch  they 
knowaiKi  the  administration  well  underetand  can  never  fee 
obtained,  but  will  be  prevented  by  the  declaration  of  wtir 
against  Great. Britain,  a  measure  fatal  to  the  eastern  and 
navigating  states.  '  ^ 

i  shttll  pass  over  at  present  the  conplaint  of  Mr.  Madi- 
son of  the  practice  of  brilish  ships  of  hovering  on  our  co^st, 
and  the  exaggerated  picture  which  iie  gives  of  the  evils 
v/hich  have  resulted  from  tl.at  practice— I  shall  howevtr 
resume  that  subject  when  I  come*o  ths  point  of  the  exclti- 
sion  of  British  ships  of  war  frorii  our  waters,  at  the  saMe 
time  that  we  gave  protection  to  French  cruizers,  and  per- 
mitted them  to  arm  in  our  ports,  and  to  make  hostile  ex- 
cursions ffoTi*  our  territory,  not  only  against  the  British 
trade,  but  against  our  ovm  defenceless  commerce. 

I  rather  prefer  to  discuss  the  principal  point  of  dispute 
between  the  two  nations,  the  obnoxious  and  much-decried 
orders  in  council— the  same  course  will  be  pursued  on  this 
point  as  Was  taken  With  respect  to  impressments— I  sliall 
first  trace  the  history  and  ground  of  those  orders  before  1 
collider  the  distorted  picture  which  Mr.  Madison  and  the 
committee  of  Congress  give  of  them. 

First,  then,  let  me  remark,  that  in  December  1807,  when 
the  ordei^  in  council  were  first  known  in  this  country,  they 
were  received  by  both  parties  without  surprize  or  emotion. 
The  natural  $ense  of  justice  which  ail  men  felt  before  thcii; 
passions  were  enlisted  against  them,  made  every  man  ac- 
knowledge and  in  some  degree  acquiesce  in  the  justice  and 
propriety  of  that  retaliation  which  Great-Britain  at  a  late 
day  and  with  visible  reluctance  adopted. 

Even  the  administration  themselves  in  their  early  discus- 
sions with  G.  Britain  on  the  subject  had  not  got  their  cue, 
had  not  learned  that  it  was  to  become  so  prolific  a  topic 
of  complaint.  The  merchants  soon  accommodated  them- 
selves to  this  new  state  of  things,  and  justly  attributed  to 
the  anti-commercial  and  tyrannical  principles  of  Bonaparte 
^^he  partial  and  comparatively  unimportant  restrictions  on 
their  trade,  and  it  may  safely  be  affirmed  and  indeed  proved 
"^TOiii  omciai  ciocuHiciits,  lutit  If  Oiii  auiiiuiiStrution  had  not 
"entered  intd  Bonaparte's  continental  system,  if  they  had  not 


iss  'v^liiGh  they 
id  can  never  fee 
^loration  of  wtir 
the  eastern  and 

'■ 
t  of  Mr.  Madi- 
ig  on  onr  co^st, 
ves  of  the  evils 
[  shall  howevtr 
int  of  the  exclti- 
;rs,  at  the  saMe 
lizers,  and  per- 
Liake  hostile  ei- 
linst  the  British 
imerce. 

point  of  dispute 
d  much-decried 
pursued  on  this 
iments— I  sliall 
orders  before  1 
iadison  and  the 

iber  1807,  when 
lis  country,  they 
irize  or  emotion, 
felt  before  thcii; 
2  every  man  ac- 
1  the  justice  and 
Britain  at  a  late 

leir  early  discus- 
3t  got  their  cue, 
prolific  a  topic 
imodated  them- 
:ly  attributed  to 
les  of  Bonaparte 
t  restrictions  on 
d  indeed  proved 
istrutioFi  had  not 
»,  ifthevhadnot 


17 

have  feS.  "^■'"'Portatmn,  our  trade  would  scarcely 
Dave  felt  any  considerable  check  to  its  wonted  prooertv 

JrZ  TS^'i  !^  '^'='""'^^'''  *»'  the>S5^;,j, 
gemrau^  m  the  first  instance,  acknowledeed  the  hiwiri. 
and  indeed  moderation  of  Grit  Brit^b  in  relatWto  hS 
twdvTZnt:X°'rV,'''^*'''y^"StoSr,Lm 

enforcine-  thpm  1?  ^  ?  ^^^P^  *'*°"'^  persevere  n 
refraS  tT'  ^^  "'^ '"  !"''*i««''g  to  them,  but  also  in 
retrain ing  from  giving  to  them  the  enormous  uniust  and 
un^alleUed  e.tent  which  IWe  had  g'^nrht  ^ 

Th^tr  nThrcaL^lr:.. eTrh-T  "'*  "°  ^'"='-"  ^"^P^"' 

menk     I  ^/     I-  '^^  Ps*'^'-  >n  their  closets  the  argu- 
Sranf  !^^  ,^'^'  ""^^'^^^  of  their  national  p^- 
Cf  ^    r      S"^  .*'"''  question  as  some  future  Gtotms 
Puffendorf  or  fiynkershoefc  would  examine  it  ' 

».'-,?  '.'to  be  a  conceded  principle  that  belligerent  ria-hta 
are  m  their  nature  paramounUo  those  of  neutoU^Se^ 

mereirfo  'hir  "  ~"?'"^''"'S  ^^  his  existe^l'lToS 
Trofi/    A         '=0"^™'en<:e,    his  accommodation  or  his 

rseiin^ZoTl"  drowning  would  be  fully  iu^ifieJ 
m  seizing  hold  of  the  garment  of  another,  althoueh  at  the 
ri.k  of  soihng  Its  beauty  or  disturbing  it  arniSent 
toS  "'t'  '"■•'^■■P™<=ip'e«it,  that  a  belligerent  Carisht 
to  seize  the  property  of  a  neutral  going  to  a  blockaded  noT? 

t1  °T.   r  u  °f  '^'"''  eoinS  to  the  relief  of  an  enemv  ? 
The  right  of  the  neutral  is  here  undoubted-It  ITt^L" 

nations  this  right  it^  surrendered  to  She  superior  claims  ani 


hiiii'ff^tiiM^M  liV  tnL^ 


i9 

t 

necessities  of  beUigcrenfs.  Before  the  invention  of  cannon 
it  could  not  have  been  unlawful  to  have  carried  an  iron 
tube,  yet  since  that  has  been  converted  into  an  instrument 
pf  war&re  it  has  become  a  violation  of  belligerent  rights. 

It  must  then  be  conceded,  that  if  a  state  of  tlimgs  should 
«rrive  or  happen  in  which  the  trade  of  a  neutral  with  one 
belligerent  should  be  absolutely  incompatible  with  the 
prosecution  of  the  war  on  the  part  of  the  other  belligerent, 
he  would  have  as  much  right  to  interdict  it  as  to  prohibit 
relief  to  a  besieged  place,  and  if  the  case  could  be  conceived 
^at  the  interdiction  of  such  neutral  trade  would  be  a  more 
effectual  means  of  reducing  an  enemy  than  the  taking  of  a 
besieged  place^  the  right  to  prohibit  such  trade  would  lie  ^ 
still  higher  one  than  that  of  prohibiting  the  entry  into  a 
bloekaded  or  besieged  fortress. 

Another  point  is  equally  clear,  that  it  is  the  duty  of  a  neu- 
tral to  treat  both  belligerents  with  equal  favor,  and  even  if, 
through  weakness,  he  suffers  one  to  take  an  advantage  of 
him  to  the  injury  of  the  other,  however  hard  the  doctrine, 
it  is  nevertheless  true,  that  the  other  has  a  perfect  right  to 
take  the  same  liberty  if  it  be  necessary  to  his  security. 

Thus  for  example,  if  one  belligerent  should  be  suffered 
by  the  United  States  to  seize  and  fortify  Castle  William,  in 
the  harbor  of  Boston,  and  should  make  it  a  rendezvous 
from  wluch  to  annoy  his  enemy,  the  other  has  a  perfect 
right  to  seize  Governor's  Island,  in  order  to  counteract  the 
efforts  of  his  enemy. 

To  apply  this  doctrine  to  the  orders  in  council — When 
Bonaparte  issued  his  decree  at  Berlin,  Denmark,  Prussia, 
Hamburg  and  Holland;  were  at  least  nominally,  and  of  right 
by  treaty,  free  and  independent  States — we  had  a  right  to 
trade  with  them  in  British  goods — we  did  in  fact  carry  on 
a  vast  and  profitable  trade  with  them  as  we  lawfully  might'; 
but  Bonaparte  marched  forces  into  these  countries  who 
were  our  friends,  and  compelled  them  by  arms  to  refuse  us 
this  trade.  Tliis  was  a  wrong  done  to  us  in  two  views 
-^First,  because  it  was  a  general  injury  done  to  all  free' 
States,  and  by  the  law  of  nations  we  had  a  right  to  com- 
Dlain  of  it.  Secondlv.  because  it  deorives  us  of  a  most 
valuable  branch  of  trade,  the  Msy  trade  about  which 


ion  of  cannon 
rricd  an  iron 
an  instrument 
rent  rights, 
tilings  should 
atral  with  one 
ble  with  the 
er  belligerent, 
as  to  prohibit 
be  conceived 
jld  be  a  more 
e  taking  of  a 
ie  would  le  ^ 
e  entry  into  a 

duty  of  a  neu- 
,  and  even  if, 
I  advantage  of 
the  doctrine, 
erfect  right  to 
security, 
lid  be  suffered 
le  William,  in 
a  rendezvous 
has  a  perfect 
:ounteraCt  the 

imcil — When 
aark,  Prussia, 
|r,  and  of  right 
had  a  right  to 
fact  carry  on 
i\'fully  might'; 
;ountries  who 
s  to  refuse  us 
in  two  views 
one  to  all  free' 
right  to  com- 
us  of  a  most 
about  which 


id 

«ie  16th  of  March  last,  that  it  wiU  finally  destroy  her. 

measure  aimed  at  her  existence. 

so  ro"*^"!"? K  '^'^;? "P°"  "«  '° f*'"'  it-we  had  a  right 

ttcEAt  '"'"'^  ""  ^  ""■"■"""  if 'helets  u?r,«"o^ 

ma^ch''tm'!«  •  ^*  *'' *'  '*'*  of  nations?  Can  Francfe 
wh^m  ^T  "'"  ^"^'y  "^""^  *"^  P^-Mful  state  with 
whom  we  have  commercial  connections  ?    Can  she  sav  to 

»,^  H  '  K  '"SM-.  or  coffee  ?  Can  she  say  this  to  HolUmd 
and  Hamburg,  or  rather  could  she  have  done  it  b^HS 
ANNEXATION  of  them  to  France,  when  they  wereS^mu^ 
^vereign  and  more  Mependenl  of  her  than  we  ake  »d 

traffrilr.^^'^""u''^°™^"'°"^''°«=««°  forbid  a  Heu. 

raichl^  ^^-  ?"*  T"!:  ^'*"^'  '"d  «=»•  >o«  lawfully 
march  an  army  into  a  foreign  country  and  forbid  a  neutral 

ine  Delligerent  ?  I  confess  I  cannot  see  a  stroneer  ca<ie  than 
this,  of  the  right  of  Great-Britain  to  ret»Ua?eTr  rtemv'a 

and  the  tyrannical  character  of  the  French  decrees  of  Berlin 
iusti- 1'  n  *•'•=  "Sht  of  Great-Britain  to  retSe  this  t 

S^unH^.T'^'  '""<^lf'='5  •■"sbeen  denied  on  various 
grounds,  and  as  we  are  about  to  undertake  a  war  in  suppm 
01  the  J'rench  decrees,  an,!  ;»  ^„„™:.;„_    ..  -t.  air.  . 


20 

retaliation  of  them  j  it  may  be  useful  to  consider  these  several 
objections  to  the  claim  of  Great-Britain. 

The  first  ground  is,  that  France  had  not  the  power,  did 
not  possess  the  means  of  enforcing  her  decrees,  that  they 
were  therefore  to  be  considered  a  mere  brutum  fulmen,  an 
empty  threat,  and  could  not  for  that  reason  afford  a  reason* 
able  excuse  to  Great-Britain  for  retaliating  them,  since  she 
on  the  other  hand  could  most  effectually  execute  her  coun* 
teryailing  orders. 

The  second  ground  is,  that  Britain  set  tht  Jlrst  example 
by  her  order  of  May,  1806,  and  therefore  was  deprived  of 
the  plea  of  retaliation,  and  must  be  considered  as  the  Jirst 
aggressor. 

The  third  is,  that  the  United  States  never  did  submit  to 
the  French  decrees,  though  they  did  not  resist  them — ^that 
they  were  not  obliged  to  resist  them,  if  incompatible  with 
higher  interests,  of  which  they  were  the  exclusive  judges. 

I  believe  that  I  have  fairly  stated  all  the  objections  to  the 
British  orders,  and  I  shall  proceed  to  give  the  plain  answers 
of  a  New- England  farmer  to  all  these  objections,  premising 
however,  that  J  discuss  this  question  not  for  the  purpose  of 
defending  Great-Britain,  but  of  disseminating  correct  no, 
tiona  of  the  dispute  between  England  and  France,  with  the 
Jatter  of  whom  our  government  have  chosen  to  take  sides. 

A^  tQ  the  first  objection  to  the  British  orders,  the  inabiUty 
of  France  to  e??ecute  her  decrees,  and  therefore  thein  inno. 
cent  character,  I  would  observe,  first,  that  this  rule  would 
be  the  most  vague,  uncertain,  and  therefore  unjust  measure 
of  right,  It  would  be  to  adopt  a  principle  which  is  never 
admitted  in  any  other  case  either  of  morals  or  legislation. 
To  measure  the  criniinality  of  a  deed  by  the  power  of  the 
party  to  execqte  it,  would  be  most  unjust,  qapricious,  and 
liable  to  the  greatest  uncertainty.  If  France,  from  the  su, 
perior  force  and  vigilance  of  her  enemy,  has  been  enabled 
to  burn,  sink,  and  destroy  on\y  fifty  of  our  ships  who  have 
committed  the  deadly  sin  of  trading  with  her  enemy,  and  if 
this  degree  of  weakness  renders  the  French  decrees  legiti, 
mate,  or  at  least  innocent,  pray  will  any  of  the  states- 
jnen  who  condemn  Great-Britain  on  this  ground,  give  us, 

the  arithmetical  rule  bv  whirh   w^  nrp   fr>  l-nrMv  wrKp,-,  c..<r^U 


er  these  several 

the  power,  did 
rees,  that  they 
im  fulmen,  an 
iFord  a  reason^ 
hem,  since  she 
;cute  her  coun- 

i  first  example 
as  deprived  of 
ed  as  the  first 

did  submit  to 
st  them — ^that 
)mpatible  with 
jsive  judges, 
jecttons  to  the 
;  plain  answers 
ons,  premising 
the  purpose  of 
ig  correct  no-r 
•ance,  with  the 
to  take  sides, 
rs,  the  inability 
ore  thein  inno,. 
his  rule  would 
injust  measure 
kvliich  is  never 
or  legislation. 
I  power  of  the 
apricious,  and 
,  from  the  su, 
been  enabled 
lips  who  have 
enemy,  and  if 
decrees  legiti, 
3f  the  states- 
ind,  give  usr 
3VV  when  such 


21 

outra^ous  violations  of  national  law  become  the  fair  sub- 
ject of  retaliation  ? 

Suppose,  instead  of  the  existing  inequality  as  to  naval 
power,  France  was  able  to  keep  a  flying  fleet  of  burning 
ships  constant^  on  the  ocean,  and  in  place  oi  fifty,  shI 
should  hMm  j,ve  hundred  ships  a  year  for  the  enormous 
transgression  of  selhng  their  surplus  produce  to  the  excom- 

Ifl?9  T    f  "f  ^'^^  "^^^°"'  ^°"^^  ^^s  vary  the  question  of 
right  i  In  the  latter  case,  it  is  obvious  that  neutrals  would 

^.c.  I^"""^^-  n"""  ^HPP'ying  Great  Britain,  and  she  would 

TLT"?^^  '"^'"•.   ^"'  ^^"  ^^'  "-^Shts  depend  upon 
so  loose  ana  vague  a  criterion  ?  Do  anyrights  repose  upon 

so  varying  and  shiftmg  a  foundation?  ^        ^ 

«T?^^!'  ^"^^  reasoned,  as  all  men  of  prudence  reason : 
ims  is  a  novel  and  most  enormous  pretension— this  is 
no  less  than  an  avowed  attempt  to  shut  me  out  of  the 

"mnv;5  nr  '^^^.  "?''.?"'•      Sh^  adopted  the  prudent 
«St   »     A  ^  Pnncipus,  oppose  the  first  inroad  oi>  my 

rights.  And  I  would  ask,  where  is  the  judicious  and 
honest  statesman,  who  wUl  point  out  the  precise  mark  at 
which  she  ought  to  have  acted  ?  Ought  she  to  have  waited 
untU  the  evil  was  brought  home  to  her  doors,  untU  her 
deserted  ports  and  ruined  commerce  would  warn  her  that 
her  case  was  without  remedy  ? 

France,  from  the  commencement  and  untU  the  present 
time,  has  executed  her  decrees  to  the  utmost  extent  of  her 
power,  and  she  at  this  moment  boasts  of  their  wisdom  and 
etticacy  in  humbling  and  enfeebling  her  enemy,  and  still 
confides  m  their  sufficiency  to  destroy  him. 
r.r.^f  ^"l^^sop^y.o^^  answer,  though  I  think  a  satisfactory 
one  to  this  objection.  Bonaparte  had  two  distinct  modes 
ot  enforcing  his  decrees;  one  of  them  was  limited  by  his 
naval  power  the  other  had  its  full  operation  on  the  conti- 
fn  V^  I?  .  ?  confined  his  decrees  to  his  own  territory, 
still  Great  Britain  would  have  had  a  right  to  complain  and 
to  retahate.  Nations  have  an  undoubted  right  to  stipulate 
the  terms  upon  which  foreigners  shall  visit  their  country  ; 
but  if,  under  color  of  this  right,  they  should  make  an  entire 
revolution  m  the  code  of  international  law,  if  in  place  of 
prudent  maxims  of  general,  policy  which '  nations 


«i 


82 

^"etimes  adopt,  thejr  should  substitute  a  novd  ai..1  m„„ 
X^     ^^  ""^^^  °^  ^^  »<»  uncivilized  CS 
"eK'tol^Ij!""''^'"  '"'"= "  right  .o\™p,J,t' 
not^auffrBA^'^'"  **"''•  '«'*  »™P'y  '^at  he  would 

to  h>»  decree  have  been  concerned  in  tradinfwith  S 
destroyed,  or  at  least  materially  affected.  " 

fil^^i^-sreSaJitt'^;^^^^ 

Pot  then  their  operation  on  the  ocean  out  of  the  oiie^tinn 

.  «ijt  Great  Britain,  as  well  as  America,  had  a  still  fiirtl,-, 
nght  to  complain  of  these  decrees   and  th„,  T      u 
most  dt«.dft.rv  enforced  by  thrums  andlatn'ce  of 
irenmark.     l  he  captures  m  Denmark  alone  are  more  than 
^e  t,me.  as  great  in  amount  as  all  the  captures  Z7r  tte 
Bnush  orders  m  councH  in  the  first  four  years  of  their  nn. 
mm     Would  Denmark  have  issued  IS  for  ^e  ^P^" 
«ure  of  Amencan  ships  laden  with  the  produce  of  BrfuS 


tc  a  novel  and  mon^ 
nerce,  should  throw 
civilized  ages,  with 
wetny^  not  only  that 
M  to  complain,  but 

imply  that  he  would 
untry,  but  that  any 

voyage  subsequent 
trading  with  Great 
r  that  cause  should 
»s  ports.  Is  this  a 
Great  Britain   had 

would  have  been 

le  Popish  doctrine 
the  navigation  acts 
the  importation  of 
It  you  may  Search 
nis  in  vain  for  any 
jfiJgacy  of  the  de, 

ut  of  the  question, 
3e  enforced,  even 
lormous  violation 
ision  on  the  prin. 
he  world  has  ever 

been  justified  by 
jurious  to  us  than 

had  a  still  further 
they  have  been 
and  influence  of 
gal,  Prussia  and 
•neare  more  than 
ptures  under  the 
ears  of  their  ope- 
)rder  for  the  cap- 
oduce  of  British 


2S 

^'^'^  could  not  en  forcTh^Ae^.  ^  argument  that 
it  in  a  most  extensCld  ciS.^''"''  ''*'  *"'  *"' 
have  before  remarked,  ^e  ca^oT^  Jhnt^Vf  «*  "^ 

setting  up  tfe  p  J!?StiC^  ^'^'  '"  '^'^'"^'^  f"""' 

foreign  relations.^  Ths  nS^  °^  *"'>"'™"ee  on  our 

Weak^inds.a„dit"':„grl^:^%^''^„*'  very  well  for 

who  have  memories  and  «i  Jl  i       ,   ,    "•     * '"se  of  "s 

be  deceived  by°t     It  is  o™K,.''"°"''«'S^  «''«'«»  cannot 

arguments  that  m  ever  tttl„°?h  "r  ""  T''  ^fi"™"''^^ 
people.  ""  ""°'^" '"  the  face  of  an  intelligent  ■ 

blocked:  "oT4"i8^r°^t°f '-J  that  the  idea  of  the 

or  an  infringemL  of'the  Uvf  of  ^^4°"?  ""^  l^'l'' 
appearance  within  our  hemisnhere  T^?»i  ■    \"  """^^  '*» 
than  four  years  after  the ISd  o^n,-    "'  ^"P'  '^lO,  more 
foil  operation.    Now  U  21  h2  T'  '^^^  '*"'  ^^  '" 
invasion  of  our  riehts  ,v5      I   ^?"  "  ^'"S"'ar  sort  of 
inet  of  France  nSrth;  'n,      ^"•''T  ">-  feo't-findin?  cab- 
ril  at  WaXn^rhld  for  1'"°'' J'''?"''"''  "itableW 
Yet  such  is  ,h?>"<5     Uave  f^;r  ^'"  *'^  '"  *«=°v^r 
respondence  between  «,r  ^         "'^  P""^"^  •''»  the  cor- 

ed  a  part  of  our  complainte  blockade  ever  form- 

tho' gft  it  t^::XT'iydih:t  ^^-  ^-  ^-  ^"^^ 

tence  „f  .runce  on  the  British  «rf>di«.,/,„;  ^^'Z::^ 


1756.  There  were  among  us  some,  who  thought  that  he 
might  as  well  have  urged  the  hwasiou  of  France  by  Ed- 
ward  the  Black  Prince.  ^ 

3dly.  But  what  ought  to  set  this  question  forever  at  rest 
and  to  crimson  the  faces  of  our  administration  and  com- 
T!m'  Yj^never  they  bring  forward  this  argument,  is  this, 
that  Mr.  Monroe,  our  minister  then  resident  at  St.  James's 
communicated  this  order  with  great  satisfaction  to  our  gov ' 
ernment,  and  expressed  his  conviction  that  it  was  a  favora- 
ble  measure,  and  indicative  of  the  disposition  of  the  British 
cabinet  to  conciliate  this  country. 

In  truth  it  was  the  measure  of  Mr.  Fox,  and  was 
mtended  to  give  a  proof  to  America  of  his  disposition  to 
reconcile,  if  possible,  the  commercial  interests  of  America 
with  the  principles  absolutely  essential  to  the  British  power 
and  existence.  It  is  an  order  very  singularly  expressed,  but 
It  was  understood  and  mtended  and  executed  in  such  a  man- 
ner  as  to  leave  open  all  our  trade  with  France  and  Holland 
except  such  as  the  admitted  principles  of  the  law  of  nations 
loroade. 

Lastly,  with  due  submission  to  the  honorable  committee 
of  Congress  I  will  venture  to  assert,  from  positive  knowl- 
edge, that  this  blockade  was  as  vigorously  enforced,  and  as 
luUy  supported  by  actual  investment,  as  the  law  of  nations 
recognised  by  ourselves  requires. 

This,  if  it  be  true,  (and  every  captain  who  entered  the 
channel  knows  it  was  so,)  (the  President's  assertion  to  the 
contrary  notwithstanding,  )/,«^^  an  end  to  the  whole  question, 
tor  Great  Britam  admits  that  if  the  blockade  was  not  actu- 
al,  It  was  illegal,  but  she  contends  it  was  actual,  and  the 
premiums  at  our  insurance  offices  against  vessels  violating 
that  blockade  will  prove  that  it  was  strictly  within  the  mod- 
ern  definition,  that  is  to  say,  that  the  «  entry  into  the  ports 
,so  blockaded  was  imminently  dangerous." 

I  have  one  more  remark  to  make  on  this  subject  of  th'^ 
order  of  May,  1806,  and  then  I  shall  quit  it.  I  believe  the 
remark  IS  new,  at  least  I  may  claim  the  merit  (if  there  is 
any)  of  being  its  author,  and  that  is,  that  the  idea  of  the 
blockade  of  May,  1806,  having  been  a  justifiable  cause  of 
the  iTench  decrees  was  for  the  first  time  sne-P-estpd  Hv  ot!r 


thought  that  he 
F  France  by  Ed- 
ion  forever  at  rest 
ration  and  com- 
trgument,  is  this, 
It  at  St.  James's, 
ction  to  our  gov- 
t  it  was  a  favora- 
ion  of  the  British 

.  Fox,  and  was 
lis  disposition  to 
ests  of  America 
le  British  power 
y  expressed,  but 
/  in  such  a  man- 
ce  and  Holland, 
le  law  of  nations 

rable  committee 
positive  knowl- 
enforced,  and  as 
e  law  of  nations 

ivho  entered  the 
issertion  to  the 
M'hole  question, 
e  was  not  actu- 
actual,  and  the 
vessels  violating 
m\\m.  the  mod- 
y  into  the  ports 

subject  of  the 
.  I  believe  the 
lerit  (if  there  is 
he  idea  of  the 
ifiable  cause  of 
^gested  by  ot!r 


25 

?finrTK\^^'°"^^  ^??''^  Armstrong  to  France,  iit 
l«uy.     1  hat  cunmng  cabinet  instantly  seized  the  pretext 
and  trom  that  moment,  and  never  before,  have  pretended 
to  justify  their  decrees  on  the  order  of  May,  1806. 

We  shaU  shew  hereafter  why  our  government  suggested 
this  excuse  to  France,  when  we  come  to  the  proof  that  in 
ail  the  proposals  of  accommodation  made  to  Great  Britain 
caJ^Z  ^°"^"^^"^have  been  invariably  annexed,  which  our 
ofX  t.  K  P'^^»^"f  y  ascertained  would  be  rejected  and 
ought  to  be  rejected  by  Great  Britain.     It  would  be  im 

fXrn?/'"''''-^^^^  ''^'  part  ofthe  subject  which  deserves 
a  separate  consideration. 

x^Za^ ^""'^ T^?°"  ?^*"'^ *^^ °^^^»*s »" council  which  thaVte 
heard  urged  is,  that  we  did  not  submit  to  the  Berlin  and 
Milan  decrees.  Those  decrees  interdicted  our  tradeWi^ 
i^ngland,  yet  m  despite  of  France  we  still  traded  with  her 
and  as  to  any  other  mode  of  resistance  we  had  not  the 
means,  or  if  we  had,  we  wefe  at  liberty  to  choose  our  own 
time  and  manner  of  doing  it; 

;.  7?  *!!'"  ^  ''''^'''^''  ^^''^^  ^^  ^°  t^^  S"tish  trade,  we  pursued 
It  only  because  it  was  profitable,  and  not  for  the  purpose 
of  proving  to  France  that  we  despised  or  opposed  her  V 
crees.     So  far  were  we  from  despismg  those  decrees,  it  is 
a  humiliating  truth  that  France  has  unremittingly  inaicted 
upon  us  the  severest  punishment  for  trading  at  all  with 
Great-Britain,  although  we  had  narrowed  that  &ade  by  our 
own  laws  in  a  manner  that  cooperated  essentially  with  the 
designs  of  the  French  government.     She  did  this  by  arms, 
by  the  law  of  strength-we  had  adequate  peaceable  means 
ot  redress,  or  at  least  such  as  we  have  thought  powerful 
against  Great.Britain--we  neglected  to  use  them.     If 
Great-Britain,  notwithstanding  this  acquiescence,  had  no 
nght  to  retaliate  on  I  ranee,  because  we  might  be  incident- 
ally  though  not  intentionally  injured,  then  it  will  follow  that 
neutrals  hereafter  may  be  as  partial  as  they  please,  and  that 
the  most  unjust  belligerent  may  always  wound  or  possibly 
ruin  his  enemy  through  the  sides  of  the  neutral 

I  have  now  finished  my  general  remarks  on  the  subject 
ot  the  orders  in  council,  and  shall  nrnrppd  'vJti.  «,,,  ^u.^- 
vations  on  Mr.  Madison's  manifesto.  '"""  "'^  ""^'^" 

4 


26 

Mr.  Madison,  not  satisfied  with  ciilliiig  the  oidcfs  in 
council  a  complicated  and  transcendent  pfece  of  injustice 
and  an  mmvatwn  without  taking  the  slightest  notice  gf 
the  prior  Irench  decrees  which  occasioned  them,  proceeds 
o  declare,  "that  they  hctve  been  moulded  and  managed  as 
^  might  best  suit  the  political  views  of  Great-Britain,  her 
commercial  jealousies,  or  the  avidity  of  British  cruisers ;" 
thus  intimating  that  her  commercial  jealousy  of  us,  and  a 
desire  to  satisfy  the  cupidity  of  her  naval  men,  were^.mong 
the  promment  motives  for  the  modifications  which  the  de- 
crees  have  undergone. 

This  is  illiberal  and  unfounded.  The  orders  in  council 
Have  undergone  no  modification  whatever  since  their  date, 
«jcept  that  of  April,  1809.  It  was  as  well  known  to 
Mr.  Madison  when  he  wrote  this  charge,  as  it  is  to  all  the 
commercial  world,  that  the  modification  of  April.  1809,  so 
«  u-  ?K  ^"^o"^"'^  to  restrain  our  trade,  opened  to  us  the 
Baltic,  the  German  Ocean,  the  French  and  Dutch  foreign 
possessions,  Spain,  Portugal,  and  part  of  Italy,  tould 
Oreat-Bntam  have  been  actuated  by  commercial  jealousy 
m  tins  measure?  Yet  it  is  the  only  change  which  has  taken 
place  m  the  orders  m  council.     The  same  remark  may  be 

Was'  t^Z  ^T^i""  ^^^^^  '^^  ^'''^''y  °f  ^'^'  <^r"i^ers. 
tWr  W«  -"^"^  ^°  ^-f'"^  ^^'^  P"'P°^^  ^°  "»^it  ^"d  restrain 
latent  fw-  ^T""'  ^?  ''"^  ^""''"^*  P^'  °f  "^'^'"^  original 
lAtJ.^.  ^"t^Jj^^^ofte"  been  thrown  out  in  Confess, 
and  by  the  President  m  his  manifesto,  tliat  plunder  was  the 
niam  object  of  the  British  orders,  and  it  has  even  been 
insinuated  that  Great-Britain  has  drawn  a  part  of  her  sub- 
sistence from  her  captures  of  American  property. 
^1  his  slander  may  do  for  the  ignorant  back- woods- men 
ot  Kentucky  more  ferocious  than  their  savage  peiRhbors  • 
but  mercantile  men  all  know,  that  the  orders  in  council 
were  scarcely  executed  in  a  single  instance  till  within  the 
past  year;  and  m  an  official  return  to  Congress,  it  appeared 
that  the  amount  of  captures  by  the  British  was  !iot  half 

Mr  M  ^-  ^'^  ^'^1^^'  "//r^^"^e  or  Denmark.  But,  says 
Mr  Madison,  and  in  this  he  is  echoed  by  the  committee 
ot.  foreign  relations,  successive  experiments  were  made  to 

see  if  Grenf-Rritqln   •r'^-M »— »   »--  ■,         .  :. 

iiaAi  ,\v/uia  icpciu  i«.r  oraers  m  council, 


tiic  ordcis  in 
ce  of  injustice 
htest  notice  gf 
them,  proceeds 
nd  managed  as 
;at-Britain,  her 
tish  cruisers;'* 
y  of  usy  and  a 
n,  were  among 

which  the  de-^ 

iers  in  council 
nee  their  date, 
veil  known  to 

it  is  to  all  the 
ipril,  1809,  so 
ened  to  us  the 
Dutch  foreign 
Italy,  fcould 
ercial  jealousy 
hich  has  taken 
;mark  may  be 
f  her  cruisers, 
lit  and  restrain 

their  original 

in  Congress, 
under  was  the 
as  even  been 
t  of  her  sub- 
erty. 

k- woods- men 
?e  neighbors ; 
;rs  in  council 
ill  within  the 
is,  it  appeared 

was  not  half 
:.  But,  says 
tie  committee 
vere  made  to 
s  in  councilj 


27 

by  offering  to  place  her  itdversaiy  exclusively  under  th,- 

y^iy  opposice  ngnt.     In  the  summer  of  1809  the  pmhorn.« 
was  reluctantly  withdrawn  in  eonsenuence  of  he  fS 
ble  and  deeded  opposition  of  the  l^orthem  States     Tnite 
place  was  substituted  the  non-intercourse  Z-t    n„.^-    n 
against  both  belligerents,  thougrffer^lrS 
Oreat.Br.tain,  m  which  it  was  provided,  that  in  case  fZr 
of  them  should  repeal  its  obnoxious  eC  Ae  PresTdtt 
should  abolish  the  restrictions  as  to  the  oAe To  reoeaW 
them,  and  they  should  be  in  full  operation  as  to  tKhT^ 
111  epmmunieating  this  measure  to^he  two  Swn^ts   iJie 

one  from  Aat  which  he  used  to  the  otlier.     To  Great  Brit 
^n  he  authorized  Mr.  Pinkney  to  say.  that  in  SS^^' 
Britain  should  repeal  her  ordeiin  council,  it  w^spfj^f 
BLE  the  President  would  give  effect  to  the  polers  vested 

ZnZl7  ?f 'f'  '^^'"^  ^™P'y  extendedTa  notifica 
ton  of  the  fact  of  repeal,  and  trie  law  itself  decWH  tw 

the  act  should  remain  in  force  against  Frmce      R^!r,i. 
was  not  the  slightest  intimation  ^th  "  in  sSan  event  tl" 
United  States  would  declare  war  against  France     There 
IS  one  other  circumstance  worthy  of  no'ice  i„  f  h^" 
nication  to  Great-Britain  in  1808!and  that  fs  that  'oT."?"- 
was  taken  of  the  blockade  of  mLv  1806  tlfrh  ^    ° 

..irj  "^^^^  ";«  P-ident  was^of  ;m. 
r„„f  ij  ■•"  1  ,~,"»'hdravv  tne  non- ntercourse  until 
Grcat-Bntain  should  have  repealed  «// f,er  der,M/a^^ 


28 

our  neutral  comtnerce  :  but  as.  Mr.  Jefferson  did  not  m 
1808  demand  the  repeal  of  the  blockade  of  May,  1806, 
the  inference  k  irresistible,  that  he  did  not  then  consider  it 
a  violation  of  our  neutral  rights.  The  same  inference  may 
be  drawn  from  Mr.  Madison's  arrangement  with  Erskine, 
which  did  not  include  the  blockade  of  May,  1806,  although 
it  ought  to  have  included  it  if  it  was  a  violation  of  our 
neutral  rights.  So  that  we  have  the  construction  of  two 
successive  presidents,  Jefferson  and  Madison,  that  the 
blockade  of  May,  1806,  was  not  a  violation  of  our  neutral 
rights* 

While  Mr.  Jefferson  only  held  out  to  Great-Britain  the 
prospect  of  a  probability  that  he  would  give  effect  to  the 
powers  vested  in  him  by  the  act  against  France,  which 
only  extended  to  a  continuance  of  the  non-intercourse,  a 
measure  perfectly  useless  to  Great-Britain,  since  her  fleets 
already  made  a  much  more  effectual  non- intercourse,  he 
authorized  Gen.  Armstrong  to  assure  France,  in  distinct  and 
unequivocal  terms,  that  if  she  should  repeal  her  deprees, 
and  Britain  should  refuse  to  rescind  her  orders,  the  United 
States  would  take  part  in  the  war  on  the  side  of  France. 

These  arp  solemn  truths,  and  on  record  in  the  department 
of  state. 

But  the  second  negotiation  on  this  subject,  which  took 
place  in  1810,  was  still  more  extraordinary.  Although  the 
blockade  of  May,  1806,  had  quietly  slept  as  we  have  shewn, 
absolutely  approved  of  by  Mr.  Monroe,  and  censured  by 
no  one,  not  even  by  France ;  although  it  did  not  make  its 
appearance  in  the  negotiation  of  1808,  nor  in  Erskine's  ar- 
rangemfsnt  in  1809;  yet  it  was  destined  to  make  a  great 
and prmeipal  figure  in  1810.  This  must  strike  every  per- 
son  with  astonishment,  that  a  great  and  overwhelming 
wrong  both  to  us  and  to  France  should  have  been  forgotten 
and  neglected  by  both  for  the  space  of  four  years.  Yet 
this  blockade  was  coupled  with  the  orders  in  council,  and 
with  such  other  pretensions  in  1810,  that  no  settlement 
could  be  made  with  Great  Britain.  I  now  proceed  to  the 
proof  of  these  assertions. 

From  the  time  of  the  promulgation  of  the  French  decree^ 
of  Milan  an^  Berlin,  v/e  can  find  no  intimation  ou  the  part 


rson  did  not  iji 
of  May,  1806, 
then  consider  it 
e  inference  may- 
it  with  Erskine, 
1806,  although 
violation  of  our 
struction  of  two 
dison,  that  the 
a  of  our  neutral 

reat-Britain  the 
ive  effect  to  the 

France,  which 
in-intercourse,  a 

since  her  fleets 
•intercourse,  he 
',  in  distinct  and 
sal  her  deprees, 
lers,  the  United 
ie  of  France, 
the  departnicnt 

:ct,  which  took 

Although  the 

we  have  shewn, 

id  censured  by 

d  not  make  its 

n  Erskine's  ar- 

•  make  a  great 

trike  every  per- 

overwhelming 

been  forgotten 

-ir  years.     Yet 

in  council,  and 

no  settlement 

proceed  to  the 

French  decree^ 
iOii  Oil  the  part 


29 

of  France  either  of  her  dissatisfaction  with  respect  to  the 
limited  order  of  Great  Britain,  of  May,  1806,  or  of  her 
determination  to  consider  its  repeal  an  indispensable  con- 
dition of  the  repeal  of  her  hostile  decrees. 

rhe  first  notice  taken  of  it,  as  far' as  we  can  find,  is  in  a 
i:J  r"?  ^^"-  A>"»"st'-ong  to  Mr.  Smith,  our  secretary  of 
btate,  of  January  28th,  1810,  in  which  he  details  aconver- 

French  '^^^l^Lt  ^"^  ^'^^  ""''^  ^"""'  Champagny,  the 
In  that  letter  Mr.  Armstrong  refers  to  a  letter  of  Decern- 

been  published,  m  which  he  is  directed  to  demand  of  France 

"  Whetlier,  if  Great  Britain  revoked  her  blockades  of  a  date  anterioi.  ♦«  «. 

irz\^T^t:^^^  ^"^  °^^""  ''-^"'»'''  n,aje.t,th2?.;:;r;jr;ciutt 

To  which  the  emperor,  falling  into  the  views  of  our 
government,  and  foreseeing  the  snare  which  would  be  laid 
lor  Great- Britain,  insomuch  as,  if  she  consented  to  repeal 
said  orders,  it  would  be  an  admission  that  she  had  been  the 
aggressor  upou  neutral  commerce,  and  further,  that  it 
would  be  an  admission  that  she  had  no  right  to  exert  her 
only  force,  her  maritime  power,  for  the  coercion  of  her 
enemy,  replied, 


u.iiiT»  „^      ^        '"'"^"}°"  required  for  the  rcTOcntion  of  tlie  decree  of  Berlin 
M.ll  be  a  previous  revocation  by  treat  Britain  of  her  blockades  of  France  or  n«wi 
of  France,  of  a  date  anterior  to  the  aforesaid  decree."  ""^  ^'^* 


So  far  the  plot  went  on  prosperously  ;  and  if  Great 
iiritain  had  fallen  into  the  project,  it  would  have  been 
made  the  pretext  for  preventing  any  future  blockades  of 
even  single  ports  of  France  in  which  armaments  for  her 
destruction  or  the  destruction  of  her  commerce  should  be 
lormed,  and  she  would  have  relinquished  to  an  enemy 
whom  she  cannot  attack  upon  the  continent  upon  equal 
terms,  the  only  weapons  which  God  and  her  own  valor  had 
placed  within  her  power. 

Gen.  Armstrong  having  so  far  succeeded,  lost  no  time 
in  transmittmg  to  Mr.  Pinkncy  this  project,  the  failure  of 
which  was  not  only  certain,  but  was  probably  calculated 
upon  oy  both  the  high  intriguing  pai'ties. 


» 


30 

whether  Great  BritL  cors[dr<ra:y,td  ran/™S 
U«'^Vm!v   ,snr    iT'i""''  ™""  ■"  particular,  except 

Lord  Wellesley  replied,  that  the  order  of  Mav  1806 
"  SoVThirh'''"'''''  I"  •  *'?  "'^'^  °f  counciiyjanuary,' 
"hat^te!  "■  ''^'^'  ''^"^^  Great-Britain  would  repeal 

Mr.  Pinkney,  on  the  7th  of  March,  1810.  asked  a  fur 

P\n^^^^  ^.^^u\  '^P^^^^  ^°  ^^^s  second  inquiry  of  Mr 
Pinkney,  'That  the  order  of  May,  1806,  had  never  been 
formally  withdrawn,  though  it  wa^  comprehended  under 
the  more  extensive  orders  of  January,  I8O7''  Tdeclt 

ed,  however,  tnat;ioo^Aer  blockade  of  the  ports  of  Frinc; 
fa:w#(?flf  anterior  to  January,  1807.         '"'^P''"^  ^'  ^^^^^ce 

As  he  had  never  been  required  to  answer  he  was  silenf 
^thte""'  "'^*'"  thlorderof  May,  1806,  wo^uMbe' 

W^""*  P'l^'^^y^  t^o"gh  not  perfectly  satisfied  with  Lord 
Wellesley's  answer,  still  deemed  it  sufficient  if  Frnce  was 

6r^''A  "-.^'.'^f  "^^^.^^'^^^  '^  G^"-  Armstrong  onThe 
6th  of  April  "That  the  inference  from  Lord  Welleslev's 

an  end    being  merged   and   comprehended  in  an  order  of 
council  issued  after  the  date  of  the  Berlin  decree." 

buch  wasMr.  Pinkney's  construction  of  Lord  Welles 
ley's  letter  ;  but  this  did  not  suit  either  the  views  of  France 
Gen.  Armstrong,  or  of  our  cabinet.     No  cause  of  quarrel ' 
no  mode  of  renewing  the  commercial  warfare  aglsTore  J 


of  LnrH  AA/i:>lloolp.. 


note.     It  was  decided  in  the  cabinet 


^f  TO    •    X  -^  -  "wvv.     it  vvdb  ucciaea  in  tne  cabinet 

of  Pans  to  compel  Great  Britain  to  makca/oW~ 


•y,  1810,  demanded 
the  same  project, 
.  and  if  any,  what 
nterior  to  the  Berlin 
I  particular,  except 
y  Lord  Wellcsley's 

ler  of  May,   1806, 

ouncil  of  January, 

did  not  intimate, 

'ritain  would  repeal 

1810,  asked  a  fur- 
'  the  order  of  May, 
anuary,  1807,  and 
s,  except  that  of 

d  inquiry  of  Mr. 
5,  had  never  been 
nprehended  under 
J07.»  Hedeclar- 
e  ports  of  France 

wer,  he  was  silent 
Yy  1806,  would  be 

tisfied  with  Lord 
ent  if  France  was 
Armstrong  on  the 
^ord  Wellesley's 
OQi.h  virtually  at 
?d  in  an  order  of 
I  decree." 
)f  Lord  Welles- 
:  views  of  France, 
:ause  of  quarrel, 
'are  against  Great 
fair  construction 
;d  in  the  cabinet 
•  ^formal  reniin- 


31 

€iation  of  her  rights,  and  if  she  had  consented  to  such  an 
numihation,  the  enmeror  rp«^rtr*>ri  ♦«  w       ir  •     ;       "  ^^ 

repeal  of  the  Berlinde^ree  "  '*'  "^^""^"^  ^"^  ^ 

of  the  construction  pu't  u%„  ^^de^s  orMarS^ 
and  Januajy  1807,  by  the  British  cabinet,  wlufhL  otter 
Tn  Id  to°ht™'  "f-  ^'"^^y'  *™g'«  »""d  c^m- 

thiJne"|Xti::.''°"'  '''*'""^  °"'  '^°  """'^'^  -"dncted 
_  Gen.  Amstrong  informs  Mr.-  Pinkney  tliat  if  Great 

wV'"''.^'*"  transmitted  to  France.  ^        '  '" 

When  the  .answer  of  tlie  British  cabinet  is  such  as  leads 

re^er'thJ.'?,?"''™'''  '™  P'''"'"'^'  ^r  ""Y  intelligent 

*i<-i  uiuers,  and  rf^nmiti/>/>  ««*  */.^  /,/-_?_.  ?      >»  ,.,         i  v.«i 

which  she  had  decK^erwrthronTo^^^ 
a«^.n<,r«/o.^<,rf,,  actually  existing,  but  somete'g  father' 


L'  #' 


32 

something  inadmissible,  that  she  slrall  renounce  "  her 
principles  of  blockade  which  she  wishes  to  establish  '* 

Terms  which  every  tnan  will  perceive  miHit  be  con- 
strued to  amount  to  the  surrender  of  all  her  maritime  rights 

We  conceive  then  that  we  have  established  our  first  pro- 
position,  that  this  demand  upon  Great  Britain  to  renounce 
her  principles  of  blockade  proceeded  frcftn  our  cabinet- 
was  a  concerted  scheme,  and  was  not  pressed  as  an  ultima- 
turn  until  it  was  well  ascertained  that  it  would  not  and  could 
not  be  yielded. 

Our  second  proposition  rests  on  simpler,  and  if  possible 
on  still  more  cone'  isive  grounds-^upon  authority  which 
Mr.  Madison  will  ..ot  deny,  because  it  is  his  own. 

We  sav,  2ndbj,  That  Mr.  Madison  when  he  demanded 
th  .T  ?"^5'  ^'  ^7'^dition  of  issuing  his  proclamation 
that  she  should  annul  her  decree  of  May,  1806,  knew  that 
he  was  not  authorized  to  annex  such  a  condition. 

1  hat  he  did  ajinex  such  a  condition  is  proved  by  a  letter 
from  our  secretary  of  state,  of  July  5th,  1810,  to  Mr.  Pink- 
ney  m  which  he  says,  «  You  will  accordingly  let  it  be  dis- 
tinctly  xinderstood  that  li  must  necessarihj  include  the  anul- 
ment  of  the  blockade  of  May,  1806." 

Now  the  right  of  Mr.  Madison  to  include  this  demand  as 
an  indispensable  condition  could  only  arise  from  the  con- 
struction put  by  him  on  the  act  of  Congress  of  May   1810 
which  authorized  him,  in  case  "either  of  the  belLcrents 
should  so  far  revoke  or  modify  its  decrees  or  edicts  as  that 
they  ceased  to  violate  the  neutral  commerce  of  the  United 
t>tates,    to  issue  his  proclamation  stating  that  flict,  and  upon 
such  proclamation,  so  made,  the  non-intercourse  wiis  to  re- 
vive against  the  other  belligerent,  if  he  should  fail  to  repeal 
his  edicts  m  like  manner  within  three  months." 
It  is  not  denied  that  the  decrees  or  edicts  which  did  vio- 
i?i®  T/  neutral  commerce   were  undefined  by  the  act 
Mr.  Madron,  by  his  agent  Mr.  Gallatin,  has  incautiously 
admitted  this  uncertainty— It  is  not  denied  that  Mr.  Mad- 
ison,  in  the  execution  of  this  power,  was  the  sole  judee  of 
the  decrees  to  which  it  extended.     It  is  a  little  unlucky, 

however,  when  the  statute  wr^Q  «rt  ,„.ri«fi.,^j  „..  i _.. 

complains,  that  Mr.  M.^dison  should  have  extended  it  to 


all  renounce  "her 
i  to  establish." 
ive  might  be  con- 
tier  maritime  rights, 
lished  our  first  pro- 
Britain  to  renounce 
rcftn  our  cabinet — 
essed  as  an  ultima- 
vould  not  and  could 

»ler,  and  if  possible 
n  authority  which 
s  his  own. 
vhen  he  demanded 
J  his  proclamation 
r,'l806,  knew  Xhsxt 
ondition. 

proved  by  a  letter 
810,toMr.  Pink- 
lingly  let  it  be  dis- 
/  include  the  anul- 

tde  this  demand  as 
•ise  from  the  con- 
ess  of  May,  1810, 
)f  the  belligerents 
s  or  edicts  as  that 
rce  of  the  United 
hat  flict,  and  upon 
rcourse  was,  to  re- 
ould  fail  to  repeal 
onths." 

ts  which  did  vio- 
ined  by  the  act. 
has  incautiously 
d  that  Mr.  Mad- 
the  sole  judge  of 
a  little  unlucky, 

s.i:^\Jl   1X3     lie    I<.U>V 

e  extended  it  to 


53 

beUigerents  should  so  renMl^      '  !•?  <=^=«  «*er  of  the 
gY  sh    H  ,,,3,  C^^^:i°^y  its  edicts  aftto 

,^  It  will  be  seen  that  the  H  ''^°P'",^'"'  S"<=Ii  mZ 
*e  same  as  i„  the  aet  rfC''^''.^  "Zt'tl/'  ^'^''S 
tas  declared  necessarily  Si  the  tl^^^""  ^^*»n 
1806.     Yet  on  the  IStlVnf  a    m   ,    ^  b'ockade  of  Mav 
after  the  blockade  of  Mat    I'snA  ^a2^'  'i"-«^  y^^^  nS 
convention  with  Mr   Sine   the  ^'"■- •*?*'°"  "'^^'^ 
hereupon  issued  his  proclamatL^fM^fi'''"  "W^''--.  and 
"whereas  Great  BritL  WUw .?    •"■"  ^'"^'  deelaring  Zt 
the  Orders  in  ComcM  of  1^ '"'"'"'^'■•'^^"'^dhim  Z 
(onlyJ^iM  haveberrenca  ed  ™,'^  ™^  November  "soV 
he  certified  that  fact  Xl^t  T  ""^  ^°"'  ^Y  of  June  next 
should  after  that  day  be  frett^'  "^^    ''''^^^t  bS 
States."    Now  as  the  w«^dt  of  b,^th"f  f'  •"■  *^  UtiTed 
the  same,  as  his  powers  tnll      ''  f^^''^"^  are  precisd^ 
'Wholly  founded  on  Ae Vets  of  Co,?*  "  P'-o-^'^ation'^J 
Great-Britain,  now  demSed  to  be?:^"'','^  '^''  ""^  "ets^f 
to  his  proclamation  of  AprU   Isno  ':!P.^''''  "i«ed  prior 

I  cabinet  ?nJ  .u';  ^  .*^^^"et  understaiidins  Vt- - 

"  '"%"  ^™"'^^'  'hxt  Great  bI^;  Su^ 


S4 


t: 


i 


: 


^ 


tequired  to  annul  her  blockades  of  a  date  anterior  to  tlie 
Berlin  decree,  and  that  this  suggestion  first  came  from  our 
cabinet,  will  appear  from  the  two  following  extracts  of  let- 
ters from  our  Secretary  Smith  to  Mr.  Pinkney,  and  one  is 
dated  July  5th,  1810,  in  which  he  says,  "  You  will  let  it  be 
distinctly  understood  that  the  repeal  must  necessarily  include 
an  annulment  of  the  blockade  of  May,  1806— This  is  the 
explanation  which  will  be  given  by  our  minister  at  Paris  to 
the  French  government,  iti  case  it  shall  there  be  required." 
It  seems  it  had  not  then  been  required  by  France. 

That  this  was  a  concerted  thbg,  is  apparent  from  another 
clause  of  the  same  letter,  in  which  Mr.  Smith  says,  diat 
"  should  Great  Britain  not  withdraw  all  her  previous  partial 
blockades,  it  is  probable  that  France  will  draw  Great  Bri- 
tain and  the  United  States  to  issue  on  the  legality  of  such 
blockades,  (that  is  all  partial  blockades,)  by  acceding  to  the 
act  of  Congress  on  condition  that  the  repeal  of  the  blockade 
shall  accompany  that  of  the  orders  in  council." 

Within  one  month  after  these  despatches  arrived  in 
France,  Bonaparte  did  brin^  us  to  issue  with  Great-Britain 
on  this  very  point,  and  yet  Mr.  Madison  was  no  prophet, 
because  it  was  he  who  first  suggested  the  thought  to  Arm- 
strong, and  Armstrong  to  the  ingenious  Cabinet  of  St. 

Cloud. 

In  support  of  this  assertion,  I  adduce  the  foUowmg  ex- 
tract of  a  letter  from  Gen.  Armstrong  to  our  Secretary, 
dated  long  before,  viz.  Jan.  23,  1810.  "In  conformity 
to  your  suggestions  in  your  letter  of  Dec.  1st,  1809,  I  de- 
manded whether  if  Great  Britain  revoked  her  decrees  of  a 
date  anterior  to  the  Berlin  decree,  his  majesty  would  consent 
to  revoke  that  decree  ?" 

It  is  much  to  be  doubted  whether  France  would  have 
ever  thought  of  such  a  condition  had  it  not  been  thus  sug- 
gested by  our  own  Cabinet. 

These  then  are  Mr.  Madison's  proofs  of  his  fair  offers  to 
Great  Britain  to  induce  her  to  repeal  her  orders  in  council. 
It  appears  tliat  it  was  impossible  for  Great  Britain  to  com- 
ply with  either  of  these  offers  without  sacrificing  her  most 


iiita, 


te  anterior  to  tlit 
it  came  from  our 
g  extracts  of  let- 
ikney,  and  one  is 
You  will  let  it  be 
lecessarily  include 
B06 — This  is  the 
inister  at  Paris  to 
ere  be  required." 
\f  France, 
irent  from  another 

Smith  says,  that 
jr  previous  partial 

draw  Great  Bri- 
e  legality  of  such 
y  acceding  to  the 
il  of  the  blockade 
ncil." 

atches  arrived  in 
irith  Great-Britain 
1  was  no  prophet, 

thought  to  Arm- 
13  Cabinet  of  St. 

the  following  ex- 
;o  our  Secretary^ 
"In  conformity 
:.  1st,  1809,  I  de- 
l  her  decrees  of  a 
;sty  would  consent 

ranee  would  have 
ot  been  thus  sug- 

of  his  fair  offers  to 

orders  in  council. 

t  Britain  to  com- 

crificing  her  most 

have  studiously 


35 

that  Great  Britah,  relaxes  tW^T"'  '"f.-'"'!  ^  «. 
jects,  and  enjoys  thaTve^  tr,T.  ?  ^^''\?{'^  own  sub, 
neutrals.  One  mX  ^»?„!  .f™"?  "^^'"^  ^he  excludes 
originally  &S  a  ZE  ^  "?f' ^  the  blockade ,™ 
relaxation  in  ij,;/ of  ^^^^on  her  enemy,  no  partial 
wm  enable  lKjlo,^^V?,,*;''^f^r^^        which  she  Ihinks 

the  enemy,  could  r^der  thrSc^kade  mf '  ^  ^™^''  '"^''^ 
nor  If  the  blockade  was  n1  W      •  ^'^  '^  to  neutrals- 
it  more  so.    One  t&ll^' "'y"*'-,  '^''"'d  this  render 
partial  relaxation  dSt  nrnl^'^  ?""  '=°""=^''^'  "«"  ^is 
relieve  France,  but  from  a  brfS^K'T  *  '""'"gness  to 
that  Britain  has  thltrj^^T-^fttSwh—  »  -'. 
and'^;^thtk%t^^r4~"""Ss  of  cofiee 
flour  ^fhichifnS;  TC''"^^  "??  l^-» '"  -^^m 
exchange  she  strengtS  W  andT  '^  ^T  '^  ^^'^ 
fectually  to  cramp  the  ^miS  Tv^   """'''  '""'^  «f- 
blockade  does  not  for  that  .S,S-.f.?f  1"^^'  '"■^b'  the 
apply  general  admitted  tmriX^'^t'"  ^  ^^S^-    Let  us 
objection.     Enemies,  S&'5""°'^  <=^^s  to  this 
^^««^.;>m»«...,  andseTd^ackitch  oth"^"!?"^"''  ^• 

Stacrtx:^„  ^™^-^' -SroTtii:: 

he  has  a  Hght  to  suSyXl'^ifht^r  '"*"^^'^>  "«« 
clotl.dtdrt'baTk  a'ilfe'C  !"''"  P'™'  «"'-  *ey 
W  t,ke„      d  „^,  with^o^'ethlr"  ""^  ""'=''  '"^ 

-t^dtpo^rSi'irRSt^l'  o^,  *'^'  -<•  "-  in- 
men  ?  Yet  the  principle  is  SeS  J  '"'"-"^y  <='°*i„g  and 

SWo^e  Soult,  whVisbesS  r '>''"'• 
vest  it  by  ,ea^  well  as  wS^^*^'  T"  ^"^  *»  ™- 

poseto  the  Spaniards  t^sSv  ,1,    "P??*  ""^  ^''°"'d  Pro- 
v'liT-    i      M   ,    -^"PP'ythemivith  ti7afsr..,i.:-u'.i-_ 

""•  i'™""^''  "^^y  '^ox'd  furnish  hfm"  wFth"  bre^S 


-  -'J 


36 

fpr  the  want  of  which  his  soldiers  are  famishing,,  could 
America  complain  of  this,  and  insist  upon  her  right  to  vio- 
late the  blockade  and  to  supply  Cadiz  with  flour  ?  Or  sup- 
pose instead  of  flour,  h^  should  stipulate  to  receive  back 
gold  to  pay  his  troops  with,  would  this  vary  the  question  ? 
Certainly  not— nan  hundred  analogous  cases  may  be  put,  but 
the  general  proposition  and  argument  is  unanswerable.  If  the 
belligerent  had  an  original  right  to  attempt  to  reduce  an  ene-r 
my  by  seige,  or  blockade,  or  by  retaliating  upon  r'-"  "''item 
of  commercial  distress,  any  partial  relaxation  i  rigor 

of  the  execution  of  such  siege  or  retaliation  to  ii*c  benefit 
of  such  belligerent  as  he  believes,  and  to  the  injury  or  hu- 
miliation of  the  enemy  cannot  afiect  the  question  of  right. 
If  therefore  France,  the  haughty  France,  which  threatens 
Brit!un  with  the  destruction  of  her  commerce,  condescends 
to  beg  and  to  receive  bales  of  British  broadcloth  to  clothe 
her  troops,  tliis  not  only  strengthens  Britain,  and  enables 
her  to  persevere  in  distressing  her  enemy,  but  it  humbles 
that  enemy  in  the  sight  of  the  world.  Such  are  the  ideas 
wluch  this  relaxation  suggests. 

I  now  proceed  to  consider  my  second  proposition,  the 
expediency  of  the  proposed  war,  both  upon  the  supposition 
of  a  successful  and  unsuccessful  issue. 

I  need  not  spend  time  to  shew,  that  the  rulers  of  a  firee 
State,  intrusted  with  temporary  power  for  the  public  good, 
have  no  right  to  embark  in  a  war  even  if  it  be  just,  unless 
there  should  be  at  least  a  reasonable  prospect  of  attaining 
the  object  of  the  war  by  arms-— unless  the  evils  proposed 
to  be  redressed,  will  in  all  human  probability  be  remedied 
by  the  war.  Individual  tyrants  can,  to  be  sure,  though  not 
lawfully,  rush  into  war  and  plunge  their  subjects  into  the 
deepest  distress,  to  gratify  their  ambition,  or  to  satiate  their 
revenge.  But  the  wise  rulers  of  a  free  people  will  never 
encounter  certain  eyils  for  dpubtftfl  good,  much  .less  in  a 
desperate  cause. 

Great  Britain  stands  in  a  situation  which  may  be  called 
unexampled.  Her  marine  power  is  greater  than  that  of 
any  other  natipn  since  we  have  any  authentic  histories  of 
civilized  society.    Opposed  to  her  is  the  gigantic  domin- 


ishin^,,  could 
r  right  to  vio-» 
)ur  ?  Or  sup- 
receive  back 
the  question  ? 
laybeput^but 
/erable.  If  the 
reduce  an  encr 
1?  -  "''item 
n  1  rigor 

to  liic  benefit 
injury  or  hu- 
stion  of  right, 
hich  threatens 
:,  condescends 
cloth  to  clothe 
n,  and  enables 
)ut  it  humbles 
1  are  the  ideas 

Foposition,  the 
Lhe  suppositioji 

rulers  of  a  free 
e  public  good, 
be  just,  unless 
jct  of  attaining 
evils  proposed 
y  be  remedied 
ire,  though  not 
bjects  into  the 
to  satiate  their 
ople  w^ill  never 
nnuch  Jess  in  a 

I  may  be  called 
sr  than  that  of 
itic  histories  of 
gigantic  domin- 


37 

vvorld  has  proS-a  ™:^'':2Z?'^''  "eawhomthe 
•her  respects  the  venerabk  ^n  J.  ?•  ^  "j"^""  ">»'  ^^  nei. 
faith  of 'treaties,  nrS,e  estabttH"f  °^  'f^'  "<>'  ^ 
tions_a  declarW  enemv  ,?.t  ^  "^'^  °^  <='vi'Ked  na- 
archical  stateras  weSL  ,o  2"^"^?^"'!^"^''  "^  -"o"- 
republics-,He  h^  ™t?  *  ^""'''^  <=«'2™s  of  free 

-bd„e,  and  ft^^none'wKLt'""  'I'V™^  '^^ 
h.  not  reduced  to  the  CLt^^^,  t^Se"!*!^? 

ofhefietrhrSX^^H*,^"'^"  "y-eans 
cessful  stand,  and  t  is  ii^aS  T''''^'"  u""*^  "  ™«- 
position  on  her  part  nrocred,  fr^  "'  ''^^^'  *«  op- 

uiterest  of  all  freS  kidet^n,",^"™'  '^S'"^  «°'h= 
IS  influenced  by  her  o^lK!  ?  '""f ''  ^  "'Aether  she 
The  eflect  upoL.s  is  t^  S^r '7  "^J:  ^er  ambition- 
ourselves  wl^^thei  ^  have  ^?.?'.  "''  ^^I"™  only  to  ask 
solute  success  of  thra™ro?Fl  'PPf  ^-^  fr°>n  the  ab- 
pocify  of  Great  BrM™toriv,.f'°'"  '^'"  ?«  '"«-^«'- 
her  with  </««r„.*,Wf  the  cL^T"'  "''°  ""-'"^^ 
combatants  were  eauld     If  I  *  '*'"'^^"  '^ese  two 

Britain  would  subdl  ivL"  TtK^.r''*'^  *^'  «'«« 
Great  Britain,  then  we  shZd'^l  I  *^"™*  "^'l  ^^^due 
which  would  be  m^tlikdvtn^^  "^"L^'"  '^^  °"'^'ves 
ought  in  that  case  to  wUh  ^s>ll  '^  *r  P°"'^-  ^d  ^e 
had  manifested  theSeatett  Hi'  *°  *at  nation  which 
eration.  ^^*'^''  disposition  to  justice  and  mod- 

•noral  character  and  ™lS?.  "/"  acquamted  with  the 
•news,  must  admk,  tC It  L  °u  ^^  "{""^  *«"•  g°™™- 
protestanc  state  to  have  ftl  ^f^  ^  'l^"'  f°'  »  f^^  and 
Britain  than  in  tte  of  France'^T-,'"  *'  ''f"'''  "<"  ^reat 
izens-she  is  essemiallv  Z.'  ^  '^  -"^^  ^y  •>"  "'- 
ftan  she  does  the  tvS  -f' ''P''."°"ation  abhors  more 
ruler  of  France  ^""""^  P™"P'»  «'Wch  actuat"*e 
Our  inffr^ao*  ♦! —  ?  _  .1 

-- ...  ..=u  .„  me  strongest  case  which  couW  be 


38 

put,  would  be  in  favor  of  the  predominance  of  British 
power  rather  than  that  of  France. 

But  the  case  I  have  put  I  may  say  is  not  only  an  impro- 
bable but  humanly  speaking  an  impossible  one.     While 
Bonaparte  every  day  boasts  both  of  his  power  and  intention 
to  humble,  reduce  and  destroy  Great  Britain,  while  lie  says 
that  "  she  will  one  day  become  as  insignificant  as  Sardi- 
nia," the  most  extravagant  Englishman  never  ventures  to 
hope  any  thing  more  than  the  reduction  of  France  to  ttie 
power  she  possessed  under  the  dynasty  of  the  Bourbons— 
and  this  we  may  add  is  a  more  improbable  supposition  than 
even  the  extermination  of  Great  Britain,  distant  as  we 
ought  to  hope  (notwithstanding  she  is  our  enemy)  that 

event  may  be.  •    j  ^    xt  «o  «p 

Let  us  suppose  then  that  our  arms  united  to  those  oi 
France  should  be  completely  successful,  (and  it  is  to  be 
presumed  that  our  president  undertakes  this  war  with  tlie 
)wpe  and  expectation  of  success,)  suppose  Great  Britain 
humbled  and  compelled  to  yield  up  her  maritime  superior- 
ity,  what  security  have  we  that  France  will  exercise  the 
advantage  which  she  shaU  have  gained  by  our  united  tYLovi^ 
and  sacrifices  with  more  moderation  and  justice,  more  re- 
gard le  the  hws  and  common  interest  of  nations  than  Bri- 
ain  has  done  ?  Shall  we  find  reasonable  grounds  «5  such 
a  hope  in  her  treatment  of  all  neutral  states  to  which  her 
arms  have  extended  ?  ShaU  we  find  it  in  her  code  of  colo- 
wal  law,  in  the  restrictions  which  in  all  past  ages  and  at  the 
present  moment  she  imposes  on  all  commerce  with  her  pos. 
sessions  ?  Shall  we  find  it  in  the  new  practices  which 
she  has  adopted  of  converting  every  captain  of  her  fleet 
into  an  admiralty  judge,  and  authorizing  him  to  bum, 
sink  and  destroy  upon  a  quarter  deck  trial  and  adjudica- 

°But  suppose  Britain  humbled,  and  the  fleets  of  France 
once  triumphant  on  the  ocean,  have  we  any  security  that 
she  wUl  not  enforce  her  pretentions  to  Nova  Scotia  and 
Canada,  and  Louisiana,  and  the  Antilles,  and  South  Amer. 
ica  and  the  Floridas  ?  Many  of  them  once  the  jewels  of  her 
^owii,  ana  auoixncniurcavuvTtaouj^'^t'j'^i  ••■' 


ze  of  British 

nly  an  impro- 

one.    While 

and  intention 

while  lie  says 

cant  as  Sardi- 

er  ventures  to 

France  to  the 

e  Bourbons — - 

pposition  than 

distant  as  we 

r  enemy)  that 

ed  to  those  of 
and  it  is  to  be 
s  war  with  tlie 

Great  Britain 
•itimc  superior- 
ill  exercise  the 
ir  united  efforts 
istice,  more  re- 
itions  than  Bri- 
ounds  for  such 
IS  to  which  her 
;r  code  of  colo- 

ages  and  at  the 
ce'with  her  pos^ 
practices  which 
tain  of  her  fleet 
r  him  to  bum, 
al  and  adjudica- 

fleets  of  France 
my  security  that 
>Jova  Scotia  and 
id  South  Amer^ 
die  jewels  of  her 
)f  iier  nmbition/? 


39 

If  these  countries  are  once  subdued  bv  !w   «,i,o*   •  x. 
W  we  to  expect  that  she  will  not  aolVn^^^^^ 

^Sfr  r-'^-  EsS'"'  -s^^ 

even  r^LVt^     ^™  '^^  '°  ^''P^"  "»'  she  will  favor  or 

n«^C  wi7h  a']  Joul  e?e*o^r,^ '''  }"  ""P^  *=>»  ^  ->' 
lie?  That  Bb^'^MZZeZ^°"^^,'^""^'^"Srepab. 

subjects  by  the  cWzenfofTh;?*  ^="""P'«=  «^'  *°  her  own 

of  goven4  theSes^*^  '"""•'^  "^^  •««»**«  right 

herTal2ltro:T^f,'-„-7,Ptf™mtheeffectsof 
count  of  our  oririn  nnr  r  '  ''^'*' '"  ^er  on  ac- 

ins.itutionrour%^;  Tlig^e'  S'ri,r,"",T'  ""^  '^^ 
who  will  affirm  tliat  she  will  nlv  V  f  "f '"^  statesman 
this  country  or  who  .n,?'  •  ""dertake  the  conquest  of 
talents,  an7C  own  dSd'a  Jr '  M  "'"'"^  P^"^"'  <^^ 

"'"  J«truction  ofcSfir  ;»f„t     ■  ''""F'-i"  the  event 
V  further  develo^iS^*  '"^  ^mmemto  requite 

we'lho^K;  'succtdlnlLtr^''""  !«-»  ^^ 
assent  to  our  demandf  s"  ""P™'"g  "P""  her  a  reluctant 

fits  of  our  neutrili,rr,7     fv      "'*  ^"^  '"st  all  the  pro. 

this  we  sSrtTe'S  fd^^'^JeT^^"  ^^-^"""^  ''- 
subject  to  the  vexatinn^  th^*  -i  !  ?  **^ance-~a  trade 
whiih  a  mUka,^  Sv^^^^^^^^  ^^  embarrassments, 

inflict.  ^  sovereign  despismg  commerce  wiU  always 

ButiftheRnMsh  vpo^:.: ... 

en.  as  i„  this  c^Yh^;:  ^^^ J^Xrc::^;,'^-!'^^; 


■jOI 


:.UV 


40 

have,  that  as  soon  as  she  had  recruited  from  olir  blows,  sh« 
would  not  again  resort  to  the  same  measures  which  she 
deems  necessary  to  her  existence?  cu    -      f    „hi 

So  that  we  should  have  the  satisfaction  of  having  fought 
and  ruined  ourselves  for  a  principle  Which  was  not  worth 
the  contest,  and  which,  when  yielded  from  necessity,  would 
be  resumed  as  soon  as  the  power  of  our  enemy  would 

^^Ihave  already  put  what  I  consider  the  two  most  im- 

probable  cases.     Let  us  now  view  our  situation  m  case  we 

should  fail  in  our  object— In  order  that  we  may  judge  ot 

the  probability  of  success,  let  us  consider  the  nature  of  this 

contest.     Great  Britain  except  in  Canada  and  Nova  Scotia 

is  as  invulnerable  to  us  as  she  is  to  France.    Bonaparte  at  hi^ 

accession  to  the  throne  of  France  declared  to  all  Europe  his 

fixed  determination  to  restore  the  marine  of  France— He 

has  had  at  his  command  the  resources  of  sixty  millions  ot 

people— He  possesses  above  100  ships  of  the  line,  200 

S^tesand  100  smaller  vessels  of  war— Yet  he  has  made 

no  sensible  advances  towards  maintaimng  an  equal  contest 

with  Great  Britain— On  the  contrary  his  march  may  be  said 

to  be  retrograde,  and  yet  he  has  had  twelve  years  ot  experi- 

ment  in  hi^proiect- Is  it  then  probable,  that  seven  millions 

S  people  scattered  as  the  citizens  of  United  States  are, 

and  a  ^eat  proportion  of  whom  are  averse  and  hostile  to 

naval  equipments,  whose  whole  navy  consists  of  sonie  liali 

a  score  of  small  ships,  can  bring  any  essential  aid  to  France 

in  this  war  against  the  British  marine? 

It  is  said  however  that  we  can  distress  her*  trade  by  our 
privateers— That  some  individual  losses  may  be  sustained 
by  her  subjects  is  not  denied ;  but  it  will  also  not  be  denied 
that  our  losses  and  her  ^ns  from  us  will  be  more  than  an 
hundred  times  as  great.^  lathis  the  way  to  reduce  a  great 
and  powerful  nation  to  our  terms? 

But  it  is  said  we  shall  take  Canada  and  Nova  Scotia-- 
This  perhaps  may  be  effected  with  much  bloodshed,  and 
greater  expenditure  than  the  whole  fee^imple  of  those  bar- 
ren provinces  would  produce- Will  this  impoverish  Great 

_   .  *:    _      ».r        T.       •«    ^u«.,    ko^ Thoc<»  nrnvinr.es 

Britain?     iNO — ii  wui  sxrcuguitu   nv* — :....-",-  ^ ^^ 

are  an  annual  charge  upon  her  revenue    Will  they  strength- 


itir  blows,  shtf 
res  which  she 

tiaving  fought 
as  not  worth 
:essity,  would 
;neiny  would 

two  most  iiTi- 
on  in  case  we 
may  judge  of 
nature  of  this 
I  Nova  Scotia 
onaparte  at  his 
all  Europe  his 
■  France — He 
ity  millions  of 
•  the  line,  200 
t  he  has  made 
I  equal  contest 
ch  may  be  said 
ears  of  experi- 
sevcn  millions 
ted  States  are, 
and  hostile  to 
5  of  some  lialf 
I  aid  to  France 

'  trade  by  our 
■f  be  sustained 
0  not  be  denied 
more  than  an 
reduce  a  great 

Nova  Scotia- 
bloodshed,  and 
e  of  those  bar- 
ipoverish  Great 

hoc<»  nrnvinr.es 

i  they  strength- 


41 

en  us  ?  No—They  will  chfeeble  us— They  will  increase 
the  jarring  materials  of  which  the  United  States  are  compo^^ 
ed,  and  which  are  already  too  discordant  for  our  peace  or 
safety—They  will  open  an  easy  entrance  to  French  power 
and  French  intrigues — Already  Frenchmen  are  admitted 
to  a  seat  in  our  national  councils,  mid  the  addition  of  Cana- 
da would  only  give  to  France  the  opportunity  of  attacking 
us  on  both  flanks  ;  for  it  ought  to  be  known  that  every 
Louisianian  and  Canadian  is  at  heart  as  well  as  by  habits  a 
Frenchman. 

But  if  xve  weaken  Great  Britain  by  assaults  upon  her 
provinces  and  commerce,  has*/te  no  means  of  annoying  us 
in  as  great  and  vital  a  degree  ?  Ask  the  underwriters. 
Ask  the  Nantucket  owners  of  whalemen.  Ask  the  mer- 
chants who  have  hazarded  millions  beyond  the  Cape  of 
Good  Hope.  See  the  citizens  of  Nantucket  fleeing  from 
their  habitations  and  sending  the  specie  of  their  banks  to 
Boston  for  safe  keeping.  Ask  the  fishermen  of  Marble- 
head  how  many  fares  they  will  get  during  the  war.  Above 
all,  ask  the  inhabitants  of  the  province  of  Maine  what  will 
become  of  their  navigation  and  their  lumber  ? 

No  country  ever  rushed  into  a  war  so  obviously  and  un- 
deniably ruinous  for  the  sake  of  maintaining  doubtful  prin- 
ciples oi  small  value,  and  which  were  so  little  likely  to  be 
obtained  by  it. 

But  if  we  attack  the  provinces  of  Great  Britain,  have  we 
any  security  that  Great  Britain  will  not  annoy  or  annihilate 
our  cities  ?  This  would  be  a  dreadful  sort  of  warfare,  (say 
some  persons)  to  which  Great  Britain  would  not  resort. 

This  is  a  strange  sort  of  reasoning — We  force  her  reluc- 
tantly into  a  war — We  plunder  her  commerce We  wrest 

from  her  her  peaceful  provinces,  but  we  expect  that  she 
will  forbear  from  doing  to  us  all  the  injury  in  her  power. 
Her  forbearance  must  then  be  much  greater  than  her  calum^ 
niators  in  this  country  have  declared. 

In  a  contest  between  two  ntitions,  the  question,  which 
will  be  the  most  likely  to  yield,  depends  upon  the  compar- 
ison oftheir  opulence  and  population,  their  military  force, 
their  capacity  to  endure  sufferings,  their  respective  habi-* 
tudes  as  to  war,  the  amount  of  the  relative  losses  which  they 


42 

may  respectively  sustain,  and  the  firmness  and  stiTngth  of 
their  political  institutions — every  man  must  admit  this  to 
be  a  fair  view  of  the  case.  Now  in  each  of  these  points 
Great- Britain  will  have  the  advantage  of  us.  Great.Britain 
has  twice  our  population,  and  at  least  four  times  our  opu- 
lence— she  has  fifty  times  our  land  force,  and  above  one 
hundred  times  our  naval  force — she  has  a  much  greater 
capacity  to  endure  sufi*erings  and  losses  from  the  above 
causes — she  has  been  inured  to  war  for  several  centuries, 
and  the  addition  of  the  United  States  to  the  number  of  her 
enemies  will  not  produce  so  much  effect  upon  her  as  did 
our  embargo,  which  we  found  by  experience  was  very  small 
— In  short,  we  have  been  her  enemy  mjactand  in  intentien 
ever  since  December,  1807,  when  Congress  laid  the  em- 
bargo to  distress  her  trade,  and  to  please  France.  As  to  the 
relative  amount  of  losses  which  the  two  countries  will  sus- 
tain, we  would  ask  whether  tlie  British  trade,  protected  as 
It  wijl  be  by  strong  convoys,  can  possibly  suffer  as  much 
from  our  twenty  ships  of  war  and  a  few  privateers,  as  we 
shall  sustain  m  our  ships  without  convoy,  and  exposed  to 
six  hundred  ships  of  war  of  Great-Britain  ^ 

Lastly,  can  it  be  believed  that  a  monarchic^,  and  aristo- 
cratical  government  like  that  of  Great-Britain  will  not  be 
better  able  to  stand  the  shock  of  another  war,  than  the  fee. 
ble,  divided,  changeable,  and  changing  rulers  of  our  nation, 
a  nation  which  goes  to  war  with  two  thirds  of  all  the  rep- 
resentatives and  senators  of  the  Northern  States  against  it  ? 
Even  a  British  minister  would  not  hazard  a  war  (supported 
as  he  is  by  600,000  men  in  arms)  with  a  majority  in  the 
house  of  lords  of  only  six  members.  What  madness  then 
must  it  be  deemed  in  our  government  of  opinion  only^  to 
hazard  an  offensive  and  ruinous  war  by  the  same  small  ma- 
jority ? 

Tliere  are  those  however  among  tlie  most  ignorant  of  the 
people  who  derive  some  consolation,  or  rather  found  their 
hopes  of  success  on  the  issue  of  our  last  contest  with  Great 
Britain.  Such  men  make  a  wretched  figure  at  estimating 
and  comparing  distant  and  dissimilar  political  events. 

Great- Britain  was  then  the  assailant — She  transported 
her  troops  3000  miles  to  conquer,  not  to  defend.     A  natioa 


id  slirngth  of 
admit  this  to 
f  these  points 
Great.Britain 
imes  our  opu- 
nd  above  one 
much  greater 
om  the  above 
;ral  centuries, 
lumber  of  her 
>on  her  as  did 
ivas  very  small 
nd  in  intentinn 
\  laid  the  em- 
ice.  As  to  the 
itries  will  sus- 
?,  protected  as 
uner  as  much 
I'ateers,  as  we 
[id  exposed  to 

Z2l  andaristo- 
in  will  not  be 
',  than  the  fee, 
of  our  nation, 
of  all  the  rep- 
tes  against  it  ? 
rar  (supported 
(lajority  in  the 
madness  then 
inion  onlt/^  to 
ime  small  ma- 

gnorant  of  the 
;r  found  their 
est  with  Great 
at  estimating 
1  events, 
e  transported 
[id.    A  nation 


43 

acting  upon  the  defensive  has  an  hundred  fold  (or  perhaps 

Tr.^  :  specially  from  a  great  distance.   The  difficulty  of 

!^W*u  "*  ^^'^^^^*  ^^  ^^'^  consequent  limited  opeixitions 
retard  the  progress  of  the  mvading  power. 

.nth"' "^•'°''  ^T  "*  '^^  former  war  not  only  united,  but 
IndV^T '  '^  ^""^^^  f'ro  ^ris  et  focis.  L  their  lives 
cudon  nf  f/-  ^^  ^^^ertainly  not  united  in  the  prose, 
sSon  nf  '  "^^^  ^u^  '°  '^^  ^'°"^  enthusiasm  in  any  de- 
mTo^nl  ^y^^'  '^  "^'f  '^  ^^^^y  condemned  by  the 
iX^H  «f  1  ?  J-'  ^°^  °P^"^y  ^^^cm^A  by  the  other.  Ve, 
Lmbftfon  ?'^'"^^"&  °"^  °^"  s«">  are  nmv  inflated  with  the 
ambition  of  conquest ;  we  are  about  to  march  to  add  new 
terntorics  to  our  overgrown  republic  at  both  extremities 
ot  our  country— we  say  to  the  North,  and  to  the  South,  to 
provinces  and  to  people  who  have  never  oflfended  us,  mA 

to  th.  "?*  -'^  °"'  ^'d' "Yield  yourselves  up  as  subjects 
to  the  victorious  arms  of  America."  ** 

far  «f  i^/T*^  '^'^''"^''^  ^^'^  *^^  ^^'^  °^  ^^e  revolution,  so 
ourSL  •  .  us  a  precedent  of  our  power  when  we  turn 
oiirselves  into  invaders,  offers  us  no  flattering  prospect. 
The  invasion  of  Canada  by  Arnold  and  MontgSmeiy,*^and 
not  "t^A  aT  ^^Pl^itio^to  Bigwaduce  or  Penobscot,  do 
not  redound  to  our  honor  m  the  pages  of  onr  history. 

nonT^h"  I     ''''^  ^"""^  "^"^^  ^^^^  ^e^son  have  we  to  com- 

el?menr«  T^  ^°^'^''/  -^^^^  ^^^^  then  on  that 
element  scarcely  be  said  to  be  inferior  to  Britain.  D'Es- 
taing  often  rode  master  of  our  coasts.  Keppel  was  driven 
into  port,  and  the  Brituh  channel  {emphatically  so  called 
tlT  ^^y)  acknowledged  for  one  moment  France  as  its 
^T'^'a  •  u  ^?"^^^"e^  naval  forces  of  France,  Spain  and 
Holland,  in  the  latter  years  of  the  war,  were  decidedly  an 
overmatch  for  the  British.  Yet  even  with  this  fear/Jdif- 
ference  between  her  power  then  and  now,  we  achieved 
nothing  agamst  her  commerce  after  the  four  first  years  of 
that  war.  Towards  the  close  of  the  war  she  picked  even 
the  pinfeathers  from  the  plumage  of  those  who  had  rioted 
on  the  plunder  of  her  commerce,  and  scarcely  an  American 
privateer  or  ship  of  war  dared  to  disolav  its  flag-  nnon  th^ 
ocean,  .  .    »  o    r 


44       . 

Wc  now  t^k^  up  fhc  third  point  which  I  proposed  to 
discuss,  that  if  the  administration  had  deliberately  resolved 
upon  war,  it  was  their  solemn  duty  to  have  made  prepara^ 
tions  to  defend  our  commerce  on  the  ocean,  to  have  en- 
couraged by  every  fecility  the  restoration  or  return  of  the 
millions  of  the  property  of  our  citizens  now  in  the  British 
dominions  and  power,  and  also  to  have  warned  our  citizens 
of  their  danger,  instead  of  keeping  their  hostile  purpose  se- 
cret, and  letting  these  measures  fall  widi  the  rapidity  of 
lightning  upon  our  unprotected  commerce, 
.  If  the  purpose  of  the  Government  had  been  long  fixed, 
and  surely  no  new  irritations  on  the  part  of  Great  Britain 
have  taken  place  within  the  last  year,  they  ought  so  to  have 
xnctiiaged  their  preparations  for  war  as  not  only  to  have 
given  ample  notice  to  our  merchants,  but  to  have  satisfied 
Great  Britaiui  that  they  were  resolved  to  resort  to  the  last 
extremity,  in  order  that  it  might  have  been  seen  what  would 
be  the  effect  of  such  d  resolution  on  the  councils  of  hep 
Cabinet.  So  fai:  was  the  conduct  of  Great  Britain  within 
the  past  year  firom  authorizing  our  citizens  to  expect  a  re- 
sort to  so  dreadful  a  remedy  on  the  part  of  our  Govern- 
ment, that  it  led  them  to  hope,  that  some  expedient  would 
lie  devised  by  our  Cabmet  to  avert  the  calamities  with 
which  we  were  threatened,  and  the  evils  which  we  actually 
suffered.  The  nomination  of  a  new  minister  to  this  coun- 
try after  the  cold  and  affrontive  dismission  of  Mr.  Jackson, 
together  witii  the  satisfactory  settlement  of  the  affair  of  the 
Chesapeake,  gave  us  reasonable  ground  to  believe,  that  the 
Government  could  npt  contemplate  an  open,  undisguised, 
sudden,  and  offensive  war. 

For  what  step  could  have  been  more  calculated  to  !ull  our 
commercial  friends  into  fatal  security  than  the  acceptance  of 
the  tendered  atonement  for  the  attack  on  the  Cliesapeake  ^ 
What  motive  could  there  be  for  adjusting  that  affair  if  our 
cabinet  then  intended  a  resort  to  arms  ? 

But  there  were  still  stronger  reasons  for  believ'ng  that 
the  Cabinet  of  this  country  would  not  rush  into  the  embra- 
ces of  France,  and  join  her  in  her  efforts  against  Great  Brit- 

tp.  Paris,  and  in  lieu  of  an  explicit  abandonment  of  her  df  - 


I  proposed  to 
'ately  resolved 
made  prepara^ 
1,  to  have  en- 
•  return  of  the 
in  the  British 
i  our  citizens 
le  purpose  se- 
he  fapidity  of 

len  long  fixed, 

Great  Britain 

ight  so  to  have 

only  to  have 

have  satisfied 

sort  to  the  last 

in  what  would 

3uncils  of  her 

Britain  within 

o  expect  a  re- 

f  our  Govem- 

pedient  would 

alamities  with 

ch  we  actually 

r  to  this  coun* 

Mr.  Jackson, 

le  afiair  of  the 

jlieve,  that  the 

undisguised, 

ated  to  lull  our 

;  acceptance  of 

Cliesapeake  :* 

lat  affair  if  our 

believ'ng  that 
nto  the  embra- 
nst  Great  Brit- 
w  amoasoauor 
[lent  of  her  df  - 


45 

crees  in  place  of  an  immediate  restoration  of  our  nroDertv* 
unjustly  surprized  by  France,  and  which  the  PresidentSd 
declared  must  be  an  indispensable  condition  of  our  retom; 
to  foendly  relations  with  her,  we  had  seen  that  France  ha^ 
^w  promulgated  her  decrees  as  the  fundamental  laws  of 
iier  empire,--that  instead,  of  restoring  our  property,  our 
minister  had  declared  that  he  had  made  no  pr^^^^ii  Z 
tainmg  redress  upon  that  point,  and  that  die  prospect  of 
success  was  both  distant  and  doubtful.  *'!'"' 

On  the  other  hand,  France  had  recently  given  new  and 
abundan  proofs  of  her  determination  to  iShilatel  ^ 
and  neutral  commerce  by  the  indiscriminate  plunder  ami 
S"       "^^  °"'  "^^  ^^"^  '^'  e^Koum^^^Th^ 

.niV^'"  'u,^^  ""^  ^^^"^  **  ^^  impossible  for  any  honest 
and  honorable  man  to  presume,  that  we  should  suddenly 
iom  France  in  her  war  against  Great  Britain.  If  howevd^ 
the  Cabinet  deemed  it  for  our  interest  to  enter  into  Z 
unnatural  a  coalition,  it  was  their  solemn  duty  to  have  in, 
creased  our  marme  so  as  to  protect  in  some  degree  our 
trade  on  our  own  coasts.  ^ 

woufll""^  K^  ^'^f  ■'1  ^''r'  ^°  ^^^^'  *^a^  ^^  attempt 
would  have  been  fruitless,  for  the  attempt  is  now  mai, 
and  our  feeble  but  gallant  navy  ordered  out  to  guard  our 

'ThW^'Tif  Tr'  '°  ?"  '"P^"^  f°'^«  of  the  enemy' 
iLitiier  then  the  defence  of  our  coast  and  waters  ought  to 

have  been  avowedly  abandoned,  or  more  effectual  melsures 
should  have  been  taken  to  render  this  defence  of  somrS 
cW  .^  """"S^  adopted  is  only  calculated  to  sacrifice,  after  a 

afford  a  feeble  and  illusory  protection  to  our  commerce 

Uur  merchants  in  pursuance  of  their  national  rights 
and  interests  had  purchased  great  quantities  of  Brkish 
goods,  and  by  the  course  of  trade,  aiii  from  the  superb 
convenience  and  security  arising  from  the  good  i^dit 
of  the  British  merchants,  had  deposited  immenV^suml  in 
Great  Britain.  If  it  had  been,  which  it  now  appears  thS 
It  wiis,  the  determination  of  the  cabinet  to  resort  to  offen. 
sivc  war,  they  ought  most  certainly  to  have  repealed  the  re 
strictions  on  the  importation  of  British  goods   and  to  have 


46 


^permitted  our  citizens  to  bring  back  their  property  in  order 
to  enable  them  to  pay  their  taxes,  and  to  support  the  bus- 
then  of  the  war.  It  is  the  first  instance,  we  believe,  in  which 
a  nation  ever  commenced  a  war  by  giving  up  to  the  enemy 
such  an  immense  proportion  of  its  own  property  and  means 
of  annoyance.  If  we  were  disposed  to  jealousy,  we  might 
say,  that  this  has  the  appearance  of  playing  into  the  hands 
of  our  enemy,  of  gratifying  the  desire  of  France  to  humble 
and  reduce  all  free  states,  and  sacrificing  the  commercial 
interests  of  this  section  of  our  country  to  the  passions  of 
the  rash  and  unthinking  representatives  of  the  south. 

Whatever  may  have  been  the  motive,  the  effect  has  been 
most  dreadful.  The  people  of  New- England  generally  had 
not  the  smallest  apprehension  of  such  a  result.  They  are 
wholly  unprepared.  When  the  embargo  was  imposed, 
they  hurried  away  their  property  as  they  lawfully  might  in 
order  to  escape  the  vengeance  of  their  own  government, 
and  they  entrusted  it  principally  with  the  very  nation  which 
the  cabinet  tell  us  must  be  our  enemy. 

If  war  therefore  had  really  been  intended  at  the  beginning 
of  the  session,  which  we  are  now  assured  that  it  was,  the 
dijity  of  a  watchful  and  paternal  government  was,  to  have 
continued  that  embargo,  and  to  have  abstained  from  hostil- 
ities until  the  property  thus  sent  into  the  very  jaws  of  the 
proposed  enemy,  could  have  been  restored  to  an  impoverr 
ished  country,  which  will  hereafter  need  all  its  resources. 

Fourthly,  in  a  war  offensive  and  unjust,  the  citizens  are 
pot  only  not  obliged  to  take  part,  but  by  the  laws  of  God, 
and  of  civil  society,  they  are  bound  to  abstain. 

This  may  appear  to  some  an  abstract  proposition,  true 
perhaps  in  itself,  but  in  practice  of  no  moment,  since  the 
citizen  can  be  compelled  to  take  his  share  of  the  burdens 
of  the  war  by  the  superior  power  of  his  sovereign.  But  in 
a  firce  government  like  ours,  it  is  no  answer  for  rulers  to  say 
to  the  people,  we  have  a  military  force,  and  we  can  and 
will  compel  you  to  do  what  we  direct,  be  it  lawful  or  un- 
lawful. The  citizen  ought  to  know  what ,  the  ruler  can 
rightfully  do ;  as  to  his  remedy  in  case  he  should  do  wrong 
that  1  will  endeavour  to  shew  hereafter. 


►perty  in  order 
)port  the  bup. 
lieve,  in  which 
to  the  enemy 
:rty  and  means 
usy,  we  might 
into  the  hands 
nee  to  humble 
le  commercial 
:he  passions  of 
e  south, 
effect  has  been 
I  generally  had 
lit.  They  are 
was  imposed, 
fully  might  in 
1  government, 
f  nation  which 

;  the  beginning 
:hat  it  was,  the 
It  was,  to  have 
ed  from  hostil- 
ry  jaws  of  the 
o  an  impoverr 
ts  resources, 
he  citizens  are 
t  laws  of  God, 
in. 

oposition,  true 
[lent,  since  the 
3f  the  burdens 
ereign.  But  in 
or  rulers  to  say 
nd  we  can  and 
:  lawful  or  un- 
; ,  the  ruler  can 
lould  do  wrong 


47 

Smr  might^t^^^^^^  -<^  ^^ 

Its  merits.        ^      ^       ^  suppress  all  examination  into 

But  the  law  of  nature  and  nations  declarer  ti,of ;      ^ 

"admL^L'*"'/-^  ^^^f"^  '^'y  ^re  membe  s^nhrya  : 

"  tTe  l^e  ZZ     I'^'l  ^^  '^T^  °"S^^  ^°  be  guided  by 
««^L  f^      r    ^  T^'""^  ^^^  already  .set  down  for  those 

"  of  others"'  B't'if'^r  P^"!!:  'f  r""'  ^^  ^^  ^l^-d" 
^'ar^  Til    -p-.  u       ^';'^'«««^^a^  thereunto,  as  usually  thev 

«  T;      "  u.  '^  ^  '^'^""'  ^^  '^'"^  '^^^  the  cause  be  « J^  J 
«L'^rK?l:Ll!?^-  ^°/-^-0.  for  that  G..isX'; 

"  to  "execuYe^X'"^;T';     ^^  J"*^'!^  ^^hj^cts  for  refusing 
10  execute  the  wicked  commands  of  their  princes,  wl 


48 


"  have  several  examples  in  sacred  story."  "  We  conclude," 
he  says,  "that  where  the  subject  doth  not  only  doubt  the 
"  lawfulness  of  the  war,  but  is  by  very  probable  arguments 
"  induced  to  believe  it  unjust,  especially  if  that  war  be  of- 
^*fensive  and  not  defensive,  he  is  bound  to  abstain."  Again 
he  adds,  in  book  IIL  chap.  x.  **  That  the  ground  of  a  war 
**  being  unjust  (although  it  be  solemnly  undertaken  as  to  the 
"  manner,)  yet  are  all  those  acts  that  are  done  in  it  unjust, 
"  so  that  they  that  shall  knowingly  commit  such  acts,  or  assist 
"  in  the  doing  of  them  are  included  in  the  number  of  those 
*'  who,  without  repentance,  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom 
^*  of  heaven." 

We  now  shall  consider,  lastly,  what  are  the  peaceable  and 
constitutional  remedies  in  the  hands  of  the  people  to  put  a 
stop  to  an  unjust,  offensive,  and  ruinous  war.  These  reme- 
dies are  of  various  sorts — they  are  such  as  belong  and  may 
be  used  by  each  individual  separately,  or  they  may  be  ex- 
ercised by  the  people  collectively — Individually,  every  man 
has  a  right  to  express  his  disapprobation ,  and  (if  he  feels  so 
strongly)  his  execration  of  the  war,  and  of  the  causes  which 
led  to  it,  as  well  as  his  horror  of  the  consequences  with  which 
it  is  pregnant — he  may  do  this  in  conversation  or  in  writing 
and  print,  he  may  circulate  these  opinions  as  widely  and  as 
extensively  as  may  be  in  his  power ;  he  may  encourage  others 
to  do  the  same,  and  may  endeavour  to  gain  as  many  prose- 
lytes to  his  opinion  as  he  possibly  can.  He  may  point  out 
to  public  censure  and  contempt  the  men  from  this  state  who 
deserted  the  interests  of  commerce  and  joined  the  standard 
of  its  enemies,  without  whose  co-operation  this  deadly  meas- 
ure would  never  have  been  adopted.  All  these  things  he 
may  do  without  being  amenable  tp  the  laws,  in  all  these  things 
he  is  expressly  protected  by  the  constitution — there  is  but 
one  limitatation  to  this  power — he  must  confine  himself 
strictly  to  truth  in  stating  his  facts,  but  in  his  reasoning  and 
inferences  he  may  take  what  latitude  he  pleases.  The  if  idl- 
vidual  hastwootherrights  on  this  subject— he  may  assemble 
and  associate  with  others  to  effect  a  peaceable  repeal  of  the 
declaration  of  war,  and  for  the  purpose  of  procuring  peace ; 

aUU   lie   liUIY      VUIC   lOl    OUV^IJ    IJlvil    1.1.3    ■.»!»»    lit     ■^vj'ii^i^S.r 

to  aid  in  the  furth^-  prosecution  of  this  ruinous  war. 


i^e  conclude," 
nly  doubt  the 
3le  arguments 
lat  war  be  of- 
itain."  Again 
•oundof  a  war 
taken  as  to  the 
e  in  it  unjust, 
li  acts,  or  assist 
imber  of  those 
» the  kingdom 

peaceable  and 
leoplc  to  put  a 
These  reme- 
;long  and  may 
:y  may  be  ex- 
illy,  every  man 
.  (if  he  feels  so 
e  causes  which 
ces  with  which 
in  or  in  writing 
widely  and  as 
courage  others 
is  many  prose- 
may  point  out 
I  this  state  who 
d  the  standard 
is  deadly  meas- 
;hese  things  he- 
all  these  things 
I — there  is  but 
:onfine  himself 
s  reasoning  and 
es.  The  ifidl- 
i  may  assemble 
le  repeal  of  the 
Dcuring  peace ; 

ous  war. 


49 

I  mi^ht  add  to  this  statement  of  the  powers  and  riehts  of 
the  individual,  that  when  called  into  service  contrary  to  the 
constitution  and  without  legal  authority,  or  when  called  to 
aid  in  executing  any  measures  which  are  a  violation  of  the 
rights  and  liberties  of  the  subject,  he  may  refuse  to  act— he 
has  a  constitutional  right  to  judge,  and  if  he  takes  care  that 
iie  is  correct  in  his  conduct,  he  wiU  be  protected  in  his  refu- 
sal  by  the  crvd  authority. 

The  individual  has  also  a  right,  and  indeed  it  is  laudable, 
to  as^ocmte  with  others  for  the  preservation  of  order  and 
quiet,  and  to  exeovite  or  assist  in  executing  the  laws.  A  city 
town  or  county  IS  disgraced  which  permit*  a  lawless  baft' 
ditti,  as  lately  at  Baltimore,  to  trhimph  over  the  prostrate  laws. 
It  is  the  worst  tyranny  which  can  happen— In  all  other  grie- 
vances you  have  redress  against  the  aggressors,  but  in  a  mob 
It  is  almost  impossible  to  discover  and  detect  the  culprits. 
Ihere  is  no  remedy  but  a  preventive  one,  and  there 
should  be  an  association  well  prepared  to  assist  the  peace 
oHicers  in  suppressing  and  bringing  to  condign  punishment 
ail  disturbers  of  the  peace.  b   i 

This  is  very  important  when  the  measures  of  government 
'"^i^L^.^^^^u"'''^''  of  idlers,  and  tend  to  ruin  the  morals 
and  habits  of  the  people.  Such  is  commonly  the  effect  of 
all  wars— such  will  particularly  be  the  case  in  ours,  which  is 
a  war  not  of  action,  but  of  suffering;  not  of  glory,  but  of 
pnvanon ;  not  m  our  own  cause,  but  in  that  of  France. 

The  people  dolLxUvely  have  a  right  to  meet  in  their  re- 
spective  towns  as  bodies  politic,  then  and  there  to  express 
their  opinions  of  the  nature  and  tendency  of  the  present 
'''''!"r'''.iP°"'^ .°"'  ^^'  destructive  effects  on  themselves  as 
well  as  the  nation— to  send,  if  need  be,  delegates  to  any 
county  or  state  conventions  which  may  be  assembled  for 
Ae  same  peaceable,  orderly  and  constitutional  purm^es— 
1  hey  may  instruct  or  advise  their  representatives  and  sen- 
ators  hovv  to  act  m  this  trying  emergency— especially  they 
may,  if  they  see  fit,  earnestly  recommend  to  the  senators  of 
this  state  to  concur  either  in  a  general  ticket  for  the  choice 
of  electors  of  President,  or  in  a  choice  of  them  by  joint 

oallot.      lliev   must  rernllert  tlmt  ^,  fl,«  ^u _r  tv...- 

.dent  depends  the  prospect  of  peace,  and  every  man,  let  his 


50 

j)oUtics  be  what  they  may,  who  is  attached  to  peace,  must 
wish  to  displace  the  man  xvho  alone  is  responsible  Jbr  this 
war — I  mean  Mr.  Madison. 

The  people  in  their  town  meetings  would  do  well  to  pro- 
vide for  the  preservatipn  of  order.  Privateersmen,  recruits 
and  beggars  will  swarm  in  our  streets,  idleness  will  beget 
crimes,  and  too  early  and  too  vigorous  measures  cannot  be 
taken  to  prevent  our  reputation  from  being  sullied,  and  our 
domestic  enjoyment  from  being  in  jeopardy. 

The  Legislature  of  the  State  also  may  do  much.  They 
have  already  done  a  great  deal  towards  the  restoration  of 
peace  by  the  dissemination  of  the  truth  and  of  sound  and 
correct  opinions.  It  is  their  legitimate  right  to  act  in  suc^i 
times,  and  Mr.  Madison  himself  in  1797  pointed  them  out 
as  the  constitutional  organs  to  defend,  protect  and  guard  the 
rights  and  interests  of  the  people  in  dangerous  and  trying 
times. 

I  have  now  finished  my  proposed  plan,  and  it  only  re- 
mains that  I  suggest  a  few  general  thoughts  and  inferencesi 
which  the  subject,  the  reasoning  already  exhibited,  and  the 
awful  situation  of  our  country,  naturally  occasion. 

If  the  facts  above  stated,  and  the  arguments  before  urged, 
deserve  any  weight,  and  I  feel  a  confidence  that  the  people 
will  think  that  they  do,  they  suggest  to  the  mind  very  pam^ 
ful  reflections— they  serve  to  shew  either  a  mistaken  policy, 
or  an  improper  bias,  and  undue  partiality  in  the  small  ma- 
jority of  our  rulers  who  have  plunged  us  into  this  calami- 
tous war.  There  are  some  other  detached  facts  tending  to 
impair  our  confidence  in  them,  and  to  shew  a  preconceived 
determination  to  enter  into  the  war  on  the  side  of  France, 
which  could  not  properly  have  been  introduced  in  the 
main  body  of  my  argument,  but  which  deserve  the  most 
weighty  consideration.  When  the  treaty  made  by  Mr. 
Jay  with  with  Great  Britain  expired  by  its  own  limitation, 
(a  treaty  ratified  by  Washington,  and  under  which  our  com- 
merce flourished  in  an  unexampled  degree,)  a  proposal  was 
made  to  Mr.  Monroe  by  Great  Britain,  to  renew  it  at  least 
during  the  existing  war  between  Great  Britain  and  France. 
This  proposal  was  submitted  to  our  Cabinet,  who  instruct- 
ed their  minister  not  to  enter  into  any  permanent  arrange- 


)  peace,  must 
isiblefor  this 

lo  well  to  pro- 
smen,  recruits 
ess  will  beget 
ires  cannot  be 
illied,  and  our 

nuch.  They 
restoration  of 
of  sound  and 
:  to  act  in  suc^i 
[ited  them  out 
and  guard  the 
)us  and  trying 

md  it  only  re- 
and  inferences^ 
ibited,  and  the 
ision. 

i  before  urged, 
;hat  the  people 
lind  very  pam^ 
istaken  policy, 
the  small  ma- 
to  this  calami- 
icts  tending  to 
1  preconceived 
ide  of  France, 
)duced  in  the 
serve  the  most 
made  by  Mr. 
iwn  limitation, 
hich  our  com- 
1  proposal  was 
new  it  at  least 
in  and  France, 
whoinstruct- 
anent  arrange- 


51 

Went  with  Great  Britain.     The  correspondence  Between  th» 

od  T »  {  f  d'sposition  of  the  two  cabinets  at  that  peri- 
chiXl  f  *','"°'"'"'  ""'■  t»™  envoys  extraordinary  ron- 
etfeil^T"'  IT^  '"*  *^  government  of  C^at  BrS 

the  same  Chbmet  which  rejected  their  own  treaty. 
Here  was  a  second  proof  of  the  disposition  of  Creat  Bri 

Is  colZ'^anclT"'"'  ^  ^^"^'^  ^'  ^^ff--"-  -^ 
Hus  country,  and  of  our  cabinet  to  avoid,  and  defeat  mirh 

was  made  b}  Mr.  Jackson,  who  assured  our  cabinet  that 

.^  e"?rv  ^oi^M  ff'^P'^r^^'^  '""  "-'"'O'ion^""  e  ' 
lie  every  pomt  of  difference  between  the  t^vo  countries  ancf 
offered  to  excliange  his  full  credentials  again^  Sar  Ces 
to  be  given  by  our  cabinet  to  any  neffotiatw  on  thSr  ™rt 

santly  found  with  some  part  of  Mr.  Jackson's  lan?ua^ 

al  littl  .^;  "''  "'  ^'"i  "^^^^^  ''"^  he  was  dismissed  with 
l-  u  ..  ?^?°">'  ""^  »  disposition  as  hostile  as  that  n 
which  the  declaration  of  war  was  made.  Mr  ErtkTne  made 
to  offer  of  atonement  for  the  aftair  of  the  Chesfbeak",  ,Xch 
was  precisely  m  the  same  terms  in  which  the  itisVrction 

sTouM^brhn  •"?  rr  "'■'T'"*-     Yet  lest  dl  SsfnS 
Should  be  buried  between  the  two  countries,  an  offensive 
clause  was  added  to  the  letter  of  acceptance  on  our  r,»X 
which  so  offended  the  British  cabinet  alo  become  onejf 
the  prmcipal  causes  of  the  rejection  of  Erskine'sarTg^: 

inemltff  i!l,!?  "''^  T''  T  """^  ^°"^  distinct  and  prom- 
'^i"'^^''}'^^f'"S  a  1  to  the  same  point,  to  prove  a  diKin. 

c.iiution  to  settteinth  til-eat  Britdn. 


52 

Now  let  us  consider  some  facts  which  shew  a  disposi 
tion  on  the  part  of  our  cabinet  to  affront  and  injure  her,  and 
to  please  and  gratify  France.  I  shall  say  nothing  of  the 
President's  proclamation,  contrary  to  the  law  of  nations,  ex- 
cluding British  ships  of  war  from  our  waters  after  the  affair 
of  the  Chesapeake,  be/breany  application  for  remedy  to  the 
sovereign,  who  insta:*  ly  disavowed  the  conduct  of  his 
officers  and  promised  reparation — But  I  must  notice  the 
conduct  of  our  cabinet  after  the  Berlin  and  Milan  decrees. 
Great  Britain  notified  us  in  February,  1807,  that  she  should 
retaliate  those  decrees,  if,,  after  due  time,  we  should  not  re- 
sist them-^This  notice  on  her  part  was  certainly  frank  and 
honorable.  The  administration  contented  themselves  with 
replying  that  France  had  declared  they  did  not  extend  to- 
us.  This  was  not  true — Mdns.  Decres,  the  Minister  of 
Marine,  in  the  absence  of  Talleyrand,  did,  to  be  sure,  say, 
that  as  the  United  States  were  specially  protected  by  treaty ^ 
the  decrees  could  not  be  intended  to  operate  on  them,  but 
he  added  expressly,  that  he  had  no  authority  to  make  any 
explanation  in  the  absence  of  the  regular  minister  for  for- 
eign relations — In  fact,  the  emperor  paid  no  regard  to  this 
explanation,  but  in  July  1807,  in  the  case  of  the  Horizon  de- 
clared "that  as  he  had  made  no  exception  in  the  terms  of 
his  decrees,  so  he  should  make  none  in  their  execution." 

In  the  same  month,  he  caused  to  be  seized  in  the  neu- 
tral States  of  Tuscany,  Naples,  and  Hamburg,  immense 
amounts  of  American  property  under  liis  Berlin  decree — 
We  took  no  measures  for  redress— we  have  taken  no  effec- 
tual ones  for  the  restoration  of  that  property  to  the  present 
day.. 

To  suffer  millions  of  our  property  to  go  into  the  coffers 
of  the  enemy  of  Great  Britain  without  a  struggle,  and 
scarcely  a  complaint,  was  a  wrong  done  to  her — was  as 
great  a  wrong  as  if  we  had  loaned  to  France  an  equal  sum, 
provided  we  had  the  means  of  redress,  which  we  most 
certainly  had,  at  least  such  as  we  afterwards  deemed  effec- 
tual, to  wit,  non- intercourse  with  her.  But  in  another  lights 
it  was  a  still  greate**  wrong  done  to  Great-Britain,  because 
these  goods  were  seiz'^d  on  account  of  their  having  been 
of  British  growth ;    thus  presenting  the   monstrous  and 


V 


£w  a  dispobi 
ijureher,  and 
ithing  of  the 
f  nations,  ex- 
ifter  the  affair 
;medy  to  the 
iduct  of  his 
St  notice  the 
lilan  decrees, 
at  she  should 
hould  not  re- 
iily  frank  and 
mselves  with 
)t  extend  ta 
;  Minister  of 
be  sure,  say,. 
led  by  treaty ^ 
on  them,  but 
to  make  any 
lister  for  for- 
-egard  to  this 
;  Horizon  de- 
the  terms  of 
execution." 
1  in  the  neu- 
irg,  immense 
rlin  decree — 
*ken  no  effec- 
5  the  present 

to  the  coffers 
struggle,  and 
her — was  as 
n  equal  sum, 
lich  we  most 
leemed  effec- 
another  light, 
tain,  because 
having  been 
onStrous  alid 


5S 

kovel  doclxine,  so  injurious  to  ail  neutral  states,  that  one 

Tcf  oft'"  "°' '"' Vi?^"  ^^*^  ^«^'^^'-  "^"''•^^  in  the  pro' 
auce  ot  the  enemy  of  France.  '^ 

Such  was  our  boasted  resistance  to  the  French  decrees  t » 

tdd  n^\V' ^n''^'\    S«^«P^^'  not  content  with  this', 
told  us  through  Gen.  Armstrong  and  Mons.  Turreau,  in 

neutr^r^?^^  ^"^^  '""'"'^''  ^^^'  ^^  ^^ould  have  no 
neutrals.  In  the  autumn  of  1807,  Dutch  and  French 
merchants  wrote  to  their  correspondents  in  this  country 
ensuinr  "^T^^  ^"r?"  '"l^^'^So  in  the  United  States  in  the 
to  sZf  al  W  •  ^'^\  Armstrong,  it  is  said,  announced 
to  several  Americans  that  our  government  would  lav  an  em- 
bargo-our  dispatch  ship  arrived  from  France,  amf  in  thr^; 
days  an  embargo  was  laid.  That  measure  Was  in  effect 
warupo^  Great  Britain-it  was  avowed  ..  such  in  Cot 

t^tSr  -^"^  -^"-^'^l^  ^?  '"^^  ^y  ^^^  friends  of  adminis- 
tration—It  was  said,  that  It  would  bring  her  to  our  feet  in 

{ZrTl^'T'  ?"  ^r^^^^^  orders  were  not  known 
W  ^^^  "^^""/^^  T'^'^^^  '''^^  adopted~Mr.  Picker- 
kn!;Jn  Wl.    ?^r,  i^?^  ^^^l^rvedly  respected  wherever  he  is 
known)  the  faithful  steady,  able,  resolute  friend  of  vour 
rights  and  interests,  has  declared  in  sundrv  public  pieces 
to  which  he  has  given  his  name,  and  has  never  been  con 
tradicted  that  the  British  orders  were  not  knovm  "n  th^ 
Senate  when  the  embargo  passed-in  fact,  they  weresom^ 
time  afterwards  communicated  by  Mr.  Jefferson  « as  a 
further  proor  or  the  wisdom  and  prudence  of  theembaL! 

^rZ.  '^^  °"^^^*?  '"T""^  ^^^"'  ^°*"  ^h^'se  benefit  w^s  The 
embargo  imposed  ?  and  against  whom  was  it  aimed  ?  We 
have  she;vn  that  the  thought  of  it  originated  in  France^! 
we  say,  moreover,  that  Bonaparte,  in  three  public  state  pa- 
pers,  approved  of  it,  and  praised  us  for  laying  it-we  sav 
that  by  his  decree  of  Bayonnehe  undertook  to  enforce  itZ 
we  add,  that  as  soon  as  we  dared  to  repeal  it,  he  issued  -i 
decree  confiscating  all  our  ships  and  cargoes  in  France. 

Ifett^^of  Mr  r  "^'  """  "u-^u'^"  ^^^^  *'°''g°"^"  the  keen 
Ifetter  of  Mr.  Canning,  m  which  he  declared,  that  the  cabi- 
net ot  Great-Britain  perfectly  understood  that  measure  as  hi- 
tended  exclusively  against  Great-Britain,  and  to  further  the 

views  and  prniVrtQ  of  Frinre      t„  ^\,^J  .,.  ,      ,    V 

-  i--j^'--  .u  1  idutf^,     ill  Duufi,  no  man  wno  iiad 


54 


-cither  cars  or  eyes,  and  who  cither  heard  the  language,  01* 
read  the  speeches  of  our  members  of  Congress,  could  doubt 
that  the  embargo  was  aimed  exclusively  against  Great- 
Britain — and  yet  it  was  imposed,  I  beg  the  public  to  recol- 
lect, it  was  imposed  before  the  British  orders  in  council 
were  known  in  this  country,  those  orders  which  now  figure 
in  the  fdre  ground  of  our  picture  of  British  wTongs. 

Can  any  man  read  this  statement,  which  is  solemnly 
true,  and  not  perceive  that  we  have  really  been  in  league 
with  France,  and  virtually  at  war  with  Britain  for  five  years 
past  ?  The  only  reason  it  was  not  before  declared  was  be- 
cause the  people  had  not  been  wrought  up  to  the  |)ropcr 
degree  of  irritation.  The  war  will  be  carried  on  upon  the 
same  principles  as  the  commercial  restriction  system  has 
been,  not  to  procure  a  i*edress  of  our  grievancegy  but  to 
uphold  the  continental  system  of  the  emperor.  For  this 
purpose,  the  restriction  on  British  goods  will  be  kept  on  ; 
and  a  bill  is  proposed  in  Congress  to  prohibit  the  exporta- 
tion of  our  own  produce  except  in  American  bottoms,  or 
in  vessels  of  nations  actually  at  war  with  Great- Britain. 
Why  this  provision  ?  American  vessels  cannot  go  without 
immense  risk — why  prohibit  our  exportation  in  any  neutral 
vessels  ?  or  in  any  vessels  of  nations  not  at  xvar  xvith  us  ? 
Pressed  to  the  earth  by  our  losses  and  our  war-taxes,  every 
vent  for  our  productions  must  be  very  important.  But  it 
must  not  be — it  is  against  the  interests  of  France  that  you 
should  supply  Spain  and  Portugal  whom  she  wishes  to  sub- 
due— perish  American  commerce,  so  that  French  arms 
and  French  policy  flourish  and  succeed.  Well  might  Mr. 
Felix  Grundy  say,  ''France  has  somehow  twisted  a  knot 
about  our  necks — we  cannot  Untie  it — we  must  cut  it  by 
the  sword."  But  in  lieu  of  cutting  the  knot,  Mr.  Grundy 
and  his  associates  have  very  sagaciously  cut  off  the  neck 
itselft!! 

I  beseech  all  sober,  scriousj  and  patriotic  men  to  ponder 
on  these  facts,  this  train  of  coincident  circumstances,  all  of 
which  are  of  public  notoriety,  and  then  say  to  what  a  dread- 
ful conclusion  they  lead.  Can  they,  after  that,  be  surprised 
at  the  present  war  ?  There  are  men,  however,  who  say,  that 
we  ought  not  to  analyze,  and  weisrh,  and  measure  our  com- 


language,  oi* 
,  could  doubt 
igainst  Greut- 
iblic  to  rccol- 
;rs  in  council 
:h  now  figure 
TOngs. 

I  is  solemnly 
een  in  league 
I  for  five  years 
lared  was  be- 
to  the  proper 
[  on  upon  the 
in  system  has 
flMcfts,  but  to 
or.  For  this 
I  be  kept  on  ; 
;  the  exporta- 
1  bottoms,  or 
Weat-Britain. 
3t  go  without 
n  any  neutral 
war  xvith  us  ? 
r-taxes,  every 
tant.  But  it 
nee  that  you 
v^ishes  to  sub- 
French  arms 
dl  might  Mr. 
*visted  a  knot 
iust  cut  it  by 
,  IVIr.  Grundv 
t  oft'  the  neck 

len  to  ponder 
stances,  all  ol* 
what  a  dread- 
,  be  surprised 
who  say,  that 
ure  our  com- 


55 

E'ih^  "^ngs-that  Britain  has  done  us  great  iniurv-. 
tliat  the  government  are  the  exclusive  judges  v^SLn  H^ 
wrongs  which  we  suffer  demand  reparation  b?  the  sworf 

Wi^rridT'''  ^"■'?^''  °^!8'>' '"  ^  d^vn  -» 
nnlJ,^      .     •    ?''  'lUfstion,  aU  good  citizens  ought  not 

be  some  weight  in  this  rem^rt     R.,f  -V    "    »     I     ^^gnt 
narisnn  r.f  fL'  i   ^^"^'*^^ — ^"^  if  upon  a  short  com- 

par  son  of  their  conduct  towards  the  two  belligerents  it 
shall  appear  that  they  are  feelingly  alive  to  e^erf  annear 
ance  of  injury  on  the  part  of  Gn4  Britab   3 arFnn 

S  S  t'i^  \  the  Uiplied  wroilpTndtsS  s,'Se 
Kicks  and  cuifs,  the  robberies  and  plunders  of  France  we 

of 'rreiirr'  "1  <='"'g\»g»inst  Great  Britrof  M 

treaty  of  peace,  she  most  honorably  executed.    Her  sliins 
of  war  have  covered  every  sea  for  twenty  years  mstpS 

illt  ^»?  "'^'"''"'^  ■'y ''"<=  ^"""^  dire  aU  d  eaS'hos 
t.hty  to  all  free  states  as  France  has  been,  we  should  no 

.,,1,  P  '•y  ""■■  government  as  a  defenceless  nrpv 

tv  oTthTtrr,  «"'^'='"^-  ,  'r'''^  P»^'  "nexam^Jed  prospS^ 

SrUes  of  mT tl'''"'  '^'r.'j  ''"^  ''^"^  '^e  boast'o?  bmh 
p.uties  of  Mr.  Jefferson  and  Mr.  Madison,  as  well  as  oth 

?o"nc1ls.  ^  J      "'  ""''  "'"'mtion  in  tfee  British 


56 

Another  idea  is  very  important-^o  honorahle  and  so 
lUSt  has  been  the  conduct  of  her  merchants,  so  upright  has 
ieen  the  deportment  of  her  government  towards  our  citizens 
who  have  traded  to  her  ports,  that  many  millions  of  dollars 
of  American  property  are  at  this  moment  deposited  with 
her  for  safe  keeping,  and  during  a  twenty  yeijrs'  war  not 
one  case  has  occurred  of  a  violation  of  the  laws  of  hospitality, 
of  seizure  of  our  property  confided  to  her,  or  of  unnecessary 

detention  or  embargo.  •!*:„„ 

Now  let  us  reverse  the  picture.     How  many  yiolattons 
of  the  laws  of  civilized  nations  has  France  committed  clur. 
ing  the  same  period  ?    I  shall  not  go  back  to  the  mfamous 
conduct  of  her  cabinet  prior  to  Mr.  Ellsworth's  treaty--! 
limit  myself  in  considermg  the  amount  of  j^er  wrongs  to 
thTffien  years  only.     ^That  treaty  of  Mr.  EHswortl^s 
stipulated  that  we  should  have  a  ri^ht  to  trade  freely  with 
her  enemy,  and  from  one  enemy's  port   to   another,  and 
from  her  enemy's  ports  to  those  of  France.     Yet  long  prior 
to  the  Berlin  decree,  she  forbade   our  entering  her  ports 
after  having  touched  in  Oreat-Britain  merely  lor  orders  and 
information.     The  Berlin   decree   annulled  this  article   of 
the  treaty  or  rather  violated  it  in  a  shameless  manner— yet 
our  government  never  complained  of  this  breach  of  treaty. 
Frsnce  has  professed  to  respect  the  doctrine  of  free  ships 
making  free  goods— yet   she  has   uniformly   confisca  ed 
British  propeny  taken  in  our  vessels,  and  has  made  it  the 
sweeping  pretext  for  condemning  millions  of  bona  hde 
American  property.     France  has  professed  to  favor  free  and 
neutral  commerce,  yet  by  her  ordinances  requiring  certifi- 
cates  of  origin,  she  virtually  forbade  the  neutral  trade  m 
the  productions  of  her  enemy,  and  thus  aimed  a  fatal  blow 
at  our  carrying  trade. 

France  was  the  first  nation  on  the  civilized  globe  (at  least 
since  the  introduction  of  admirality  courts)  which  authorized 
its  cruisers,  in  violation  of  the  laws  of  nations,  to  bum, 
sink  and  destroy  neutral  ships  and  cargoes  on  the  high  seaj 
without  any  manner  of  trial.  This  injury  has  not  been 
casual,  but  systematic  and  repeated.  Mr.  Jefferson  com. 
plained  of  it  as  the  "most  distressmg  mode  m  which  belli- 
grants  exercise  might  conirary  to  nghi.         iw  .,.-^- 


bje  and  so 
upright  has 
our  citizens 
IS  of  dollars 
losited  with 
irs'  war  not 
f  hospitality, 
unnecessary 

ly  violations 
imitted  durr 
he  infamous 
I's  treaty — I 
r  wrongs  to 
EHsworth*s 
;  freely  with 
another,  and 
'et  long  prior 
g  her  ports 
or  orders  and 
lis  article   of 
manner — yet 
ich  of  treaty, 
of  free  ships 
'   confiscated 
s  made  it  the 
of  bona  fide 
favor  free  and 
uiring  certifi- 
itral  trade  in 
i  a  fatal  blow 

rlobe  (at  least 
ch  authorized 
)ns,  to  bum, 
the  high  seas 
has  not  been 
efferson  com- 
11  which  belli- 
Yet  every 


57 

squadron  which  has  issued  from  her  ports  since  1805  has 
contmued  he  practice,  and  no  apolog?  hos  ever  been  ™dj' 
norany  redress  given  for  this  i^h^^  a„d  unexampled 

.m™"""'  •?"  ^  '"'"P*^^  "'"'*«■  "Jwdicnt  equally  new 
among  civilized  states.  She  has  seized  property  in  h^erom^ 
ports  which  entered  them  under  the  Jegimrd  of  the  iZ 

on  thl  h  ' '  J'""'""'^  f^"^  ""  ""»"  ever  adopted,  except 
on  the  breaking  out  of  a  ivar.     For  this  wrone  Mr  Mad 

poVr*ra'n'or  "T  r  ''^  '^  "^™^"-'^-  ^  - 

Moogy,  or  a  promise  of  future  recomnence-  and  Mr 

diem  on  Win  ^  •  '"  ''T'^  °^  reparation-he  begged 
fhe^vnr  ^h^  ?"".-'■  """'"l''!S>  but  they  sturdily  refusld- 
the  war,  the  compliance  with  the  emperor's  orders,  may 
bring  us  a  harvest  of  promises,  but  the/  wiU  still  be /vS 

France  also  has  treated  us  diplomatically  with  the  sreat 
est  possible  indignity.     Turreau  declaredLr  L  «,f  bw 
our  national  pride  never  rises  at  French  insX     Chim 

gy,  and  less  free  than  the  colony  of  Jamaica."  Mr  Mad- 
■son  instructed  Mr.  Armstrong  to  notice  this  insult  fwn 
ycjrs  since,  and  that  is  the  vj,  la,t  th^we  hL  "Tk.     ° 

tio?n?^n/  ".'""  '\  ^  ^^^"""^  "•=•»  o"*-  honor  or  our  na- 
t  onal  m  erest  are  the  motives  to  this  war.   when  we  find 

fhfquestil*^'"  '"^  ''^'^  ^'>^"^--  '-P-y"' 

not'fiit  hnl''F"'>"'!i'""?£'"''^  °'"' '"^y-  *at  we  can- 
not  hght  both  England  and  France,  then  I  reply,  that  our 

itevt  rr  ''^''''^  "'^'  ^'^  3houid^fi&:"e: 

B'Sr^S"^  '""■"  "^  ^hr^^rSrepaLionrXit' 
Britain  has  made  us  proposijs  respecting  all  her  iniuries 

a  r%™fa  magnanimLapSogy  audSS 
8 


58 

Ominterest  required  that  we  should  fight  Frai'be,  if  fight:^ 
ing  be  indispensable,  because  in  losing  the  trade  of  France 
we  lose  the  sale  of  only  three  millions  of  dollars  per  annum 
—in  eivint?  up  that  of  Great  Britain  we  lose  thirty  rnilhons 
—France  could  not  possibly  hurt  us  more  m  vvar  than  she 
has  always  done  in  peace-Great  Britam  can  rum  our  com- 
merce,  can  Mict  an  injury  which  fifty  years  ot  wioc  policy 

'''' But  [tT 'said  that  France  ha$  repealed  her  decrees  and 
Britain  refuses  to  perform  hei  promise  to  repeal  her  orders. 
To  those  who  with  a  knowledge  of  the  facts  Can  con- 
tend  for  this  proposition,  all  argument  would  be  vain. 

If  neither  the  reiterated  declarations  of  the  emperor,  ot 
iiis  courts,  of  his  marine  officers,  nor  his  personal  decisions 
in  tlie  Dantzick  cases,  nor  the  daily  destruction  of  our  ships 
will  convince  men,  « neither  would  they  be  convinced 
even  if  one  should  rise  from  the  dead. '    ISee  Note  2.] 

But  one  remark  ought  not  here  to  be  omitted,  and  th^t 
is  that  Britain  has  lately  actually  repealed  her  orders  in 
coun  1,  to  take  effect  wL  the  /rench  shall  have  repealed 
^..nmW.A.rc/.crm-and  she  has  declared  th^^^ 
shios  taken  after  such  a  nomina   repeal  of  the  French  cle- 
crees  shall  be  instantly  restored  m  admiralty,  without  any 
hoarder  to  that  effect— It  is  at  such  a  moment  as  this, 
Z  wfundertake  to  fight  Great  Britain  for  maintaining  her 
orders  in  council  and  to  join  Frai.ce  in  supportmg  aiKl  en- 
forcing  her  decrees ! !  I  shall  now  quit  this  topic  and  take  my 
elvelf  my  fellow-citizens,  not  because  it  is  exhau^e^ 
'  for  I  scarcely  know  how  to  repress  the  many  thoughts 
Which  occur  on  this  fertile  subject^,  but  I  aim  at  -^^l^^ 
and  I  have  said  as  much  as  most  readers  will  be  disposed 

^T^L  man  can  conscientiously  say,  after  the  perusal  of 
this  candid,  well  authenticated,  ^ell  supported  st^ement^^^^ 
facts  that  he  thinks  we  have  good  cause  of  war  aganst 
Great  Britain,  and  that  it  is  both  polit  c  -d  just  to  sing  e 
her  out  in  preference  to  France,  why  then  let  him  buckle 
on  his  armour,  and  fight  manfi.lly,  though  ^mtlessly,  in 
the  cause  of  France ;  but  those  of  my  fellow  farmers  who 

. ,  u-  1  -t--^  *i-"  "'"r  '°  "**'tber  lust  nor  expeoient, 

with  me  inuiK  mui  "jw  ytmi  *«  .^^i^-j.vi  jv._i  -  •=.       j- 


if  fight- 
France 
annum 
millions 
;han  she 
ur  comr 
ic  policy 

ees,  and 
r  orders, 
ian  con- 
ain. 

peror,  of 
iecisions 
3ur  ships 
onvinced 

and  that 

orders  in 

repealed 

that  all 

ench  de- 

hout  any 

t  as  this, 

lining  her 

r  and  en- 

i  take  my 

xhausted, 

thoughts 

lity  alone, 

;  disposed 

perusal  of 
rtement  of 
^ar  against 
t  to  shigle 
m  buckle 
Ltlessly,  in 
mers,  who 
expedient. 


^^9 

and  who  know  it  will  be  ruinous,  will  lea^^e  no  constitution, 
al  measure  untried  to  put  an  end  to  so  fatal  a  measiire. 

But  it  may  be  said,  and  it  is  often  said,  it  is  now  too  late 
to  discuss  the  merits  of  the  declaration  of  war.    The  Ru- 
bicon is  passed.     It  is  your  duty  to  submit  and  aid  as 
much  as  possible  in  the  prosecution  of  the  war.     It  is  not 
patriotic  to  vindicate  the  conduct  of  a  nation  whom  your 
government  has  declared  your  enem^^     Let  us  before  w6 
part,  my  fellow  citizens,  consider   this  subject.      Every 
war  is  supposed  to  have  some  defiuite  object.     That  object 
ought  to  be  a  legitimate  and  honest  one,  otherwise  the  war 
IS  unjust.     Jt  ought  also  to  be  a  practicable  and  attainable 
one,  otherwise  the  war  is  inexpedient.      It  ought  not  to 
expose  us  to  greater  evils  and  dangers  than  those  which  we 
would  wish  to  remedy,  otherwise  it  is  rash  and  4estructive. 
In  order  then  to  know  for  tvhc;  n'e  are  to  fight,  and  hoiu 
long  we  ought  to  fight,  and  what  we  are  to  insist  upon  as 
an  ultimatum  froc;i  our  enemy,  it  is  necessary  to  discuss 
iDefore  the  people,  (who  have  as  yet  heard  onbj  one  side  or 
the  question  from  the  inijamed  speeches  of  members  of 
Congress)  the  whole  merits  .of  this  war. 

If  we  are  hom^  forever  to  approve  of  this  war,  because 
a  majority  of  six  senators  only,  (no  wiser  nor  better  than 
ourselves)  saw  fit  to  declare  it  in  complaisance  to  the  pres- 
ident,  why  we  may  as  well  give  up  the  right  of  suffrage  at 
once  to  this  oligarchy,  and  let  them  save  us  the  trouble 
of  future  elections.  But  if  we  have  a  right  to  change  our 
rulers  and  to  put  in  better  men,  men  who  love  peace,  rather 
than  a  hopeless  war  j  it  is  necessary  that  we  should  also 
have  the  right  and  power  to  shew,  that  the  present  men  h.tve 
abused  their  trust  by  plunging  us  into  an  unjust  war  w  hich 
might  and  ought  to  have  been  avoided.  What  limit  will 
our  friends  of  freedom  set  to  the  right  of  discussing  the 
merits  or  propriety  of  continuing  the  war  ? 

Suppose  after  ten  or  twenty  years  of  war,  our  posterity 
shall  find  the  country  impoverished,  our  commerce  destroy, 
ed,  our  young  men  sacrificed  in  fruidess  expeditions,  the 
nation  ground  to  powder  by  taxes  and  paper  money — and 
suppose  our  enemy  still  triumphant  on  the  ocean,  and  that 
all  the  prophecies  about  her  downfall,  sjiaii  prove  iikisorj-, 


60 

would  not  some  future  patriot  ia  1832,  be  authorized  to  ad- 
dress the  people,  and  assure  them  that  the  war  was  rumous, 
that  the  points  for  which  we  were  contending  were  not  worth 
the  contest,  and  that  Britam  it  was  evident  could  not  be 
compelled  to  yield  them,  and  that  for  these  reasons,  they 
ought  to  turn  out  those  who  were  fgr  continuing  the  war, 
and  put  in  those  who  would  restore  peace  ? 

Would  not  such  a  man  be  a  true  patriot  ? 

Well  then,  where  will  you  draw  the  line  as  to  the  time 
when  the  war  may  be  opposed?  Shall  it  be  fixed  at  six 
months,  a  year,  ten  years,  or  twenty  ? 

I  should  say,  that  from  the  moment  war  is  declared,  those 
who  conscientiously/  opposed  its  declaration  have  a  right,  and 
to  preserve  consistency,  are  bound,  to  endeavour  to  bring 
about  a  peace  by  shewing  the  folly,  the  wickedness  and  th^ 
^vils  of  the  war. 

Nay,  I  go  farther — ^the  sooner  you  do  this,  and  the  more 
strenuously,  and  vigorously,  and  undauntedly  you  urge  it, 
the  more  true  patriotism  you  discover.  For  by  these  means 
you  may  put  an  end  to  the  war  before  its  evils  are  fully 
realised,  and  while  the  countiy  still  possesses  some  com- 
merce wortlj  saving ;  but  there  wiii  be  little  or  no  merit 
In  opposing  the  war  some  twenty  years  hence,  when  an 
oppressed,  And  impoverished,  and  desperate  people  rise  as 
they  will  eventually  do,  and  look  around  in  despair  for  the 
authors  of  their  calamities  who  will  thcH  seek  refuge  in  caves 
and  mountains,  and  call  upon  the  rocks  and  hills  to  cover 

(hem. 

What  is  this  doctrine  that  an  insulted  people  hear?  W hy, 
that  a  measure  big  with  the  fate  of  seven  millions  of  people 
passed  in  secret  conclave,  (and  as  the  case  might  be,  and 
almost  was,  by  a  single  vote,  and  that  for  aught  they  could 
know,  a  cornipt  one,)  is  not  only  to  be  binding  upon  them 
as  a  law,  (that  they  know  and  will  submit  to)  but  its  jus- 
tice,  its  wisdom,  its  expediency  must  not  be  questioned  ! ! 

You  may  change  your  rulers  next  November  they  tell  you ; 
but  you  must  not  shew,  that  Seaver,  and  Cutts,  and  Rich- 
ardson, and  Widgery,  and  Green,  have  sacrificed  your  inter- 
ests,—have  abandoned  you,  helpless  and  forlorn,  to  the  curses 
pf  French  alliance  aqd  the  sweeping  and  resistless  force  of  the 


61 


ed  to  ad- 
I  ruinous, 
lot  worth 
Id  not  be 
ons,  they 
the  war, 


the  time 
;d  at  six 

'ed,  those 
right,  and 
to  bring 
>s  and  th^ 

the  more 
a  urge  it, 
?se  means 
are  fully 
me  corn- 
no  merit 
when  an 
)le  rise  as 
lir  for  the 
;e  in  caves 
J  to  cover 

r?  Why, 
of  people 
\t  be,  and 
hey  could 
ipon  them 
It  its  jus- 
istioned ! ! 
y  tell  you ; 
and  Rich- 
,'our  inter- 
the  curses 
:)rce  of  the 


BriUsh  marine.  Thes;e  are  not  my  maxims.  I  say,  meet, 
comprehend,  weigh,  consider,  discuss  the  causes,  secret  and 
avowed,  the  progress  and  the  consequences  of  this  dreadful 
and  needless  war.  Inquire  who  are  its  authors,  and  who  are 
opposed  to  it.  Compare  them  together — at  the  head  of 
the  friends  of  peace  you  will  find  Jay,  and  King,  and  Pink- 
ney,  and  Strong,  and  Pickering,  and  Oilman,  and  Gore, 
and  Smith,  and  Otis,  and  Oriswold,  and  Hillhouse,  and 
General  Brooks,  and  all  the  other  friends  of  Washington; 
and  in  favor  of  it  you  will  find  Madison,  and  Dearborn, 
and  Cutts,  and  Widgery,  and  Seaver,  and  Austin,  and 
Homans,  and  perhaps  some  of  the  colonels  and  lieutenant 
colonels,  contractors,  army  agents  and  custom  house  spies. 
Take  away  in  this  state  the  men  who  hold  places  under 
the  governmjent,  and  there  is  scarcely  a  man  of  any  distinc- 
tion who  is  not  a  friend  to  peace.  L^t  then  your  suppli- 
cations, remonstrances,  resolutions,  groans  and  complaints 
be  wafted  on  every  breeze  to  the  President's  throne.  Turn 
your  eyes  instantly  towards  such  firm,  upright,  undeviating 
patriots  as  will  save  the  commonwealth  in  this  perilous  time, 
and  suffer  those  who  have  abused  your  confidence  "^o  re- 
turn to  private  life;'*''  but  above  all,  preserve  union  and  con- 
cert in  all  your  measures.  Recollect  the  old  maxim  of  our 
revolution,  which  is  still  more  important  to  be  applied  to 
New  England  and  the  commercial  states  now  than  it  was 
THEN,  United  we  stand,  divided  we  fall. 

A  NEW-ENGLAND  FARMERv. 


$'' 


NOTES. 


^roTE  i. 

It  may  be  asked,  why  u>  muoli  time  is  devoted  to  the  ftigtament  apon  the  orders 
in  Coanoil  ? 

We  aniSwer.  Because  the  old  enmplaints  of  impressment,  and  of  Tjovering  on 
<mr  coasts,  and  the  general  principles  of  blockade  adopted  by  Great  Britain,  are 
only  the  light  and  shade,  the  mere  colouring  of  the  principal  ostensible  cause  of  the 
■war.  Any  man  who  will  review  the  course  of  negotiation  between  us  and  Great 
Britain  will  perceive,  that  ance  the  settlement  of  the  affair  of  the  Chesapeake,  the 
orders  in  Council  of  April,  1809,  are  the  only  ostensible  causes  of  liostility  which 
have  been  urged  against  Great  Britain.  Mr.  Erskine's  arrangement  extended  mih/ 
to  the  satisfaction  for  the  attack  on  the  Chesapeake  and  to  the  repeal  of  the  orders 
in  Council.  All  the  minor  points  in  dispute  were  left  untouched,  and  yet  Mr. 
Madison  undertook,  on  the  unauthorized  promise  of  Mr.  Erskine  to  restore  Great 
Britain  to  the  situation  of  the  most  favored  natioi),  upon  the  settlement  of  the 
Chesapeake  affair,  and  the  repeal  of  the  orders  in  Council  only,  leaving  the  other 
pretended  causes  of  war  wholly  unadjusted. 

We  are  now  however  at  war,  and  in  order  to  know  for  what  we  engage  in  this 
dreadful  calamity,  we  are  to  seek  the  answer  in  the  twms  of  Erskine's  arrange- 
ment, Mr.  Madison  having  restored  Great  Britain  to  her  trade  with  us  by  tl)at  ncp 
ffoliation,  and  he  was  not  authorized  to  do  this  until  Great  Britain  ceased  to  riolate 
cur  neutral  rights. 

We  have  a  ri§^ht  then  to  say,  on  '^is  authority  of  Mr.  Madison,  that  the  orders 
in  Council  are  the  sole- cause  of  the  war,  and  those  wAo  wish  far  peace  must  eitJieV 
i>elieve  that  those  orders  are  not  justifiable  causes  of  war,  or  roust  contend,  that 
their  repeal  must  be  made  a  sino^qua  non,  an  indispensable  condition  of  any  treaty 
of  peace. 

Now,  believing  as  I  do,  that  their  i-epeal  will  not  be  granted  by  Great  Britain  un- 
sdl  the  united  arms  of  France  and  America  reduce  her  to  the  lowest  degree  of  hu- 
miliation and  weakness,  or  until  the  Berlin  and  Mi'.n  decrees  are  repeated  ;  and 
believing,  tliat  it  is  neither  just,  nor  for  our  interest,  to  compel  her  to  rescind  tlicM 
while  those  of  her  enemy  anterior  in  point  of  time  are  in  full  force,  I  have  thougfit 
it  expedient  to  endeavour  to  satisfy  the  citizens  of  our  country,  that  the  repeal  i)f 
the  orders  in  Council  ought  not  to  be  an  ultimatum  in  our  demnnds  in  a  ncgotiatirii 
for  peace.  If  we  are  not  persuaded  of  this,  it  is  vain  and  hopeless  to  clamour  for 
peace.  Peace  we  probably  never  shall  have,  if  wc  contend  for  the  repeal  of  the 
orders  in  Council,  unless  France  should  revoke  bona  fide  her  decrees. 

It  will  become  now  a  point  of  honor  with  our  enemy  to  maintain  them.  Yet  if,  as 
Mr.  Madison  and  his  friends  contend,  the  orders  in  Council  are  a  signal  act  of  injus- 
4;ice,  ^vholly  unprovoked  and  unwarranted  by  the  l.'tws  and  usages  of  nations,  no 
honorable  man  could  ask  the  government  to  make  peace  while  those  orders  remain 
in  force. 

It  is  because  I  believe,  that  those  orders  were  so  far  as  respected  France,  the 
3i%'g;ce.wor,  justifiable.  It  is  because  I  belicVe  that  a  moderate  share  of  spirit  and 
honorable  impartiality  on  our  part  would  have  procured  the  repeal  of  the  French 
decrees,  or  at  least  have  induced  Great  Britain  tq  rescind  her  orders  in  Council,  th^t 
I  have  entered  so  much  at  large  into  this  argumetit. 

I  now  advance  an  opinion,  which  I  fully  believe  will  appear  hereafter  to  he  co;*- 
rect,  that  until  we  can  bring  onrselves  to  view  this  question  canilidli)  as  belwetMi 
two  powerful  belligerents,  the  one  fighting  for  existence  and  the  other  for  conquest, 
until  we  can  perceive  that  Great  Britain  was  constrained  ■Jjy  the  paramount  law  of 
self  preservation  to  retaliate  on  her  enemy  her  own  unexampled  iiijustiec,  we  mu|t 
content  ourselves  with  a  perpetual  war,  (unless  France  should  recede  from  her  sVs- 
tem)  or  else  hail  as  a  blessing,  the  greatest  possible  of  all  calamities  to  us,  the  sub- 
jugation of  Great  Britain  by  the  common  enemy  of  the  iiiiman  race.  Those  who 
can  derive  consolation  from  such  a  prospect,  may  rot  heed  our  arguments,  or  give 
credit  to  our  motives,  but  sober  men  will  reflect  and  weigli  the  dreadful  conse- 
quences before  they  dpcide  to  coatcad  for  so  questiouable  and  so  unimportant  a 
pointt 


63 


I  the  orders 

lovering  on 
Britain,  are 
ause  of  the 
an^  Great 
ipeake, the 
tility  which 
tended  onbi 
'  the  order? 
nd  yet  Mr. 
store  Great 
lent  of  the 
;  the  other 

gage  in  this 
!*s  arrange- 
by  tl)at  nei- 
id  to  violate 

tlie  orders 
must  eitjier 
intend,  that 
■  any  treaty 

Britain  un- 
igree  of  hii- 
icaled  ;  an'l 
ssciiul  thcM 
ave  thougfit 
le  repeal  of 

ncgotiatifn 
clamour  for 
epeal  of  the 

J.   Yet  if,  as 

act  of  injus- 

nations,  no 

ders  remain 

Fra7Ue,  the 
)f  spirit  and 
tiie  French 
Council,  th^t 

!r  to  be  coj*- 
as  belwewi 
rii-  conquest, 
ount  law  of 
cc,  we  inu$t 
•oni  her  sVs- 
U3,  the  sub- 
Those  who 
3nts,  or  give 
idful  conse- 
iinpo'taut  a 


^ote  2. 

Bonaparte  has  sach  a  thorough  contempt  for  his  new  ally.  Mr.  MacMson  that  1>* 
takes  no  pains  to  spare  his  feelings  or  support  his  character  Nnw  t  S'  '  . 
nominal  repeal  of  the  Berlin  and'^Milan  frecree  would  taVe  he?D^d  Mr  m"",?''"' 
much,  and  not  have  injured  the  emperor's  system  i^^he  least  f  J^^e  mi^ht  s^ftve 
condemned  under  special  decrees,  as  he  has  lately  done-l,;  Xht "  U  have  bS^ 
evenr  American  ship  on  the  ocean,  and  never  havi  had  his  impS  r?posSstS 
by  the  nnquiet  complaints  of  his  new  ally.  But  as  if  purposely  to  proclaim  S  the 
yrrld  his  utter  contempt  of  our  governn.ent.  and  his  aLolutecontrorover  iT  he  ha^ 

Su^v^V^"  n  '  ^?"  ^"^  Pri^  °^'^'"''°"'  '^'''  ''i'  decrees   v^S,r  repealed 
.^  .c/'Z.'^°H'''  ''".."."V  *'"'^  •'^  f°"nd  us  marching  on  as  straitlv  as  he  could  S 
to  fulfil  his  orders  of  fight  ng  Great-Britain  '    THp  last  o.-tiJoi  f~7   v  . 

anothei-repetition  of  lis  uLuZ  ?Sdict?o!!'o?Mr."Mal  S""  ^"'°^''  ''""*"'"' 

1  he  Moniteur  (Bonaparte's official  panerl  declare<i  "that  fJ.„  v-lL^^v.  i 
not  repealed  with  respect  to  Americans  tiUAnril  28  l8ll".K»f^^?  *'*"'''"'»  ^":« 
after  Lv  president's  Uclamation  declaSg  them  ?^^^  in  NoveS  TsiTJ'^H 
after  the  arriva  in  l^ance  of  news  of  c/r  non-intLcZ4  acH?  Mar  h  isTl 
which  was  construed  to  be  a  caus  rg  our  riirhts  to  be  resnprto.?.  c^  ..^*»'^*'"»  »«". 
that  the  condition  annexed  to  the  Sue  delXe's  leUex- of  A^ust  1  To%"PP^»" 
condition  precedent.  But  the  French  decrees,  accord  ng  to  thi  Mon  tn  ,p'  '"'  * 
not  repealedin  May  last,  for  it  concludes  with  this  seSLeL^Lct  Engfi  ^eX 
her  new  legislation  of  blockade  and  her  orders  in  council,  and  the  Berlfn  and  MHan 
decrees  -wtll  be  annulled  and  all  neutrals  treated  in  France  as  tLv"  ere  previous 
to  the  presen  war."  Thi.  was  at  the  very  moment  when  MaS  was  wS  a 
niaiiisesto  declaring  the  decrees  repealed.  "uibou  was  wiiung  a 

Now  wAar  ,ieutrals,  we  would  ask,  are  there  in  the  present  war '  Upon  whoni 
are  these  rr  peals  and  promises  of  Bonaparte  to  operate  ?  At  the  time  wh7n  th« 
arock  n;  tl.e  Moniteur  was  written.  Anierica  was  ^  sort  of  neutral-a  neSt^Hn 
every  tlung  but  impartiality  in  its  dealings  ,  now,  alas  !  Europe  and  America  io  not 
coutnin  a  single  neutral  sti.te.  Britain  stands  alope  against  the  world Tpfemlin^  W 
right  to  retaliate  her  enemy's  injustice  on  himself,  a^nd  ,ve  havraSitd  Se 
for  the  avowed  object,  as  the  Moniteur  tells  us,  of  compelling  EnglanV  o  witlHTraw 
her  retahatory  orders,  (,fter  which,  it  informs  us,  FiUce  will  rev^e  hTr  S 
decrees,  rthat  is  to  s.y,  if  she  pleases,  and  can  do  no  better.)  But  when  E„£d 
«reducea  to  that  state  of  humiliation,  I  think  his  majesty's  promisIswoSd6*J 
wa/i^lormer  ones,  be /orfoWffM.  *     ""="  womn,  a^^ 

J^ote  3. 

™I'**'.'?f°P'''  are  to  be  deluded  into  the  belief  that  liliis  war  is  to  be  prosecuted 
wi  hout  the  imposition  of  new  taxes ;  Congress  have  therefore  postponed  the  tax- 
bil  s--but  they  are  on\y  postponed .  After  the  election,  when  Mr.  kadisoi's  place 
will  be  secure,  they  will  be  passed,  or  if  not,  an  immense  debt  (if  they  can  prSure 
loans)  will  accumulate,  and  then  the  only  boon  we  shall  have  will  be  that  our  children 
will  be  taxed  instead  Qt  ourselves.  Now  the  liability  to  taxation  at  a  future  day. 
tZl^^  •'"■V«"'ty  that  that  day  must  derive,  actually  reduces  the  present  value  of  ou^ 
houses,  our  farms,  and  tlie  price  of  labor  nearly  in  as  great  a  degree  as  immediate 
impositions  or  taxes.  The  future  taxe.  indeed  will  be  enhanced  in  propoSn 
to  the  accumulation  of  debt,  and  will  be  more  severely  felt  than  if  gradually  imposed. 
Public  credit  will  in  the  mean  t.me  suffer,  and  the  price  of  every  thing  which  the 
f^han"cTd^"*  ""^  '"^^"''"^  *'*''"  ^^^  ^'PP"'"^  "f  ^V  war  will  be  greatly  and  needlessly 
The  people,  particularly  of  the  Northern  States,  are  now  in  fact  taxed  for  the 
war,  and  will  soon  feel  its  pressure  by  ihe  diminished  value  of  their  real  estates,  by 
the  reduced  price  of  labor,  and  the  difficulty  of  finding  employment,  and  by  th* 
JSwJi«  i' ^r^  ^*  f  ""•  *^  •^'  ^"^'S"  commoditi,^,%hi«U  hate  beioZ  ahno!t 


